| |
Main
Date: 28 Oct 2007 12:06:15
From:
Subject: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving my
bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of time. Is
this normal?
Youssef Eldakar
|
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 11:52:20
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Oct 29, 9:43 am, Diablo Scott <DiabloScottNOS...@terra.es > wrote:
> The helium though diffuses through the latex balloon at a higher rate
> than the other gases, for whatever reason,
I would imagine that the reason is that the helium molecules are much,
much smaller than any gas other than hydrogen.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 20:10:30
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Hank Wirtz wrote:
> On Oct 29, 9:43 am, Diablo Scott <DiabloScottNOS...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>> The helium though diffuses through the latex balloon at a higher rate
>> than the other gases, for whatever reason,
>
> I would imagine that the reason is that the helium molecules are much,
> much smaller than any gas other than hydrogen.
>
monatomic hydrogen is smaller, but molecular hydrogen is bigger.
hydrogen gas like you'd have in a balloon is molecular.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 14:17:05
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Youssef Eldakar writes:
> I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving
> my bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of
> time. Is this normal?
You may have noticed that toy balloons also lose pressure in a short
time. They being thinner skinned than bicycle inner tubes are also
more permeable and go flat even faster by the same mechanism.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 09:43:20
From: Diablo Scott
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Youssef Eldakar writes:
>
>> I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving
>> my bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of
>> time. Is this normal?
>
> You may have noticed that toy balloons also lose pressure in a short
> time. They being thinner skinned than bicycle inner tubes are also
> more permeable and go flat even faster by the same mechanism.
>
> Jobst Brandt
The gas used to fill most helium balloons is a mixture of helium and
other (heavier) gases, the mixture of which has a specific gravity low
enough to provide sufficient buoyancy at a more economical price than
pure helium.
The helium though diffuses through the latex balloon at a higher rate
than the other gases, for whatever reason, and that's why a day-old
balloon with half the original gas volume has so much less buoyancy than
a half filled new balloon with fresh gas.
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 19:23:15
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Diablo Scott writes:
>>> I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving
>>> my bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of
>>> time. Is this normal?
>> You may have noticed that toy balloons also lose pressure in a short
>> time. They being thinner skinned than bicycle inner tubes are also
>> more permeable and go flat even faster by the same mechanism.
> The gas used to fill most helium balloons is a mixture of helium and
> other (heavier) gases, the mixture of which has a specific gravity low
> enough to provide sufficient buoyancy at a more economical price than
> pure helium.
> The helium though diffuses through the latex balloon at a higher rate
> than the other gases, for whatever reason, and that's why a day-old
> balloon with half the original gas volume has so much less buoyancy than
> a half filled new balloon with fresh gas.
I think I hear not right! Where did you see helium mentioned in what
I wrote. Maybe the modern child never inflated a balloon my blowing
into it. That's too bad. Breath inflated balloons go flat much
faster than a bicycle tire and from a far lower pressure.
Lets not get permeability, solubility, diffusion and partial pressures
of gas molecules into this. Thin rubber membranes are not gas proof.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 14:07:26
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
nitrogen is used caws it's dry - H20 cawses imbalance, higher friction.
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 10:21:06
From: Marian
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Nov 1, 3:20 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Carl Fogel writes:
> >>> A rubber inner-tube filled with water, on the other hand, is going to
> >>> be squishing a lot of water around as it rolls, and the mass of the
> >>> water will be swirling uselessly, so there will be more drag.
> >> The two times I had to do this, I cannot say I noticed any
> >> difference in drag. Or otherwise. This was on the Moulton, which
> >> has full suspension, so that would have masked some of the effects.
> > Interesting--I just fooled around with a calculator a bit to see
> > what the practical effect might be.
> > Even a large increase in rolling resistance will barely show up in
> > the top speed recorded coasting downhill on a good cyclocomputer,
> > according to this calculator:
>
> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocityN/velocity.html
>
> > If you zero watts and roll both bikes down the same -6% grade, they
> > reach 53.775 km/h.
> > Raise the rolling resistance 50% from 0.0050 to 0.0075, and the bike
> > with squashier tires drops to 52.539 km/h, only 1.236 km/h slower,
> > about a 2% speed change. In other words, the top coasting speed
> > would drop to 28.37 mph from 29.04 mph, a difference that no one is
> > likely to notice without the help of microchips.
> > For a 10% speed change down that hill, you need to raise the rolling
> > resistance to about three times the original 0.0050, up to about
> > 0.0150--and that's still just dropping about 3 mph from about 30
> > mph.
> > I'm trying to resist the urge to fill a spare front wheel with water
> > and roll down my daily highway descent a few times.
>
> When you do that, make sure to let all the air out as the tire gets
> near full. With the valve at the top and press down on the tire flat
> against the inflation stem so there is no higher space for the air to
> rise above the water. Pushing down on the WHEEL in this position
> should ultimately squirt only water out of the Presta valve. Then
> fill the tire the rest of the way to full.
>
> I used my Silca frame fit pump for that task because it is easy to
> fill with water and has a large enough volume to make it a relatively
> quick job. It doesn't take nearly as many strokes as filling the tire
> with air.
Okay now that you've told us how...
Why?
(Whether or not it happens to be the truth "because" and "I wanted to
see what would happen" are not valid answers.)
-M
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 11:24:52
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:21:06 -0000, Marian
<marian.rosenberg@gmail.com > wrote:
>On Nov 1, 3:20 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>> Carl Fogel writes:
[snip]
>> > I'm trying to resist the urge to fill a spare front wheel with water
>> > and roll down my daily highway descent a few times.
>>
>> When you do that, make sure to let all the air out as the tire gets
>> near full. With the valve at the top and press down on the tire flat
>> against the inflation stem so there is no higher space for the air to
>> rise above the water. Pushing down on the WHEEL in this position
>> should ultimately squirt only water out of the Presta valve. Then
>> fill the tire the rest of the way to full.
>>
>> I used my Silca frame fit pump for that task because it is easy to
>> fill with water and has a large enough volume to make it a relatively
>> quick job. It doesn't take nearly as many strokes as filling the tire
>> with air.
>
>Okay now that you've told us how...
>
>Why?
>
>(Whether or not it happens to be the truth "because" and "I wanted to
>see what would happen" are not valid answers.)
>
>-M
Dear Marian,
Jobst once had no spare and a pinhole leak in a tubular. The tire went
flat in a few minutes, so he filled the tube with water from a creek
and was able to finish his ride before the water leaked out:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/a336cc675d115c0c
Water is much more viscous than air, so it takes far longer to leak
out through the tiny hole--imagine trying to empty a 32-ounce water
bottle (roughly the volume of a tubular) through a pinhole.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 21:42:45
From: Aeek
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:21:06 -0000, Marian
<marian.rosenberg@gmail.com > wrote:
>Why?
>
>(Whether or not it happens to be the truth "because" and "I wanted to
>see what would happen" are not valid answers.)
for the fish!
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 12:32:54
From: Joe Riel
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org writes:
>> I'm trying to resist the urge to fill a spare front wheel with water
>> and roll down my daily highway descent a few times.
>
> When you do that, make sure to let all the air out as the tire gets
> near full. With the valve at the top and press down on the tire flat
> against the inflation stem so there is no higher space for the air to
> rise above the water. Pushing down on the WHEEL in this position
> should ultimately squirt only water out of the Presta valve. Then
> fill the tire the rest of the way to full.
Nice tip, I hadn't thought of that.
> I used my Silca frame fit pump for that task because it is easy to
> fill with water and has a large enough volume to make it a relatively
> quick job. It doesn't take nearly as many strokes as filling the tire
> with air.
--
Joe Riel
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 12:30:14
From: Joe Riel
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
carlfogel@comcast.net writes:
> I'm trying to resist the urge to fill a spare front wheel with water
> and roll down my daily highway descent a few times.
The fun part is coming up with a technique for completely filling the
tube with water, that is, removing all the air. It's a bit tricky,
since the valve is on the inner circumference of the torus, so there
is no location that forces the air to the valve.
One strategy---only practical in the lab---is to first roll the tube
up, forcing out all the air, and then close the valve. Insert tube in
tire, mount on rim (a bit of a pain since the tube has no air) and
then submerge part of the wheel with the valve, open it, connect pump,
then fill it up. That should ensure a minimal amount of air.
In the field, I didn't worry about it.
--
Joe Riel
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 08:09:20
From: Joe Riel
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
carlfogel@comcast.net writes:
> A rubber inner-tube filled with water, on the other hand, is going to
> be squishing a lot of water around as it rolls, and the mass of the
> water will be swirling uselessly, so there will be more drag.
The two times I had to do this, I cannot say I noticed any difference
in drag. Or otherwise. This was on the Moulton, which has full
suspension, so that would have masked some of the effects.
--
Joe Riel
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 19:09:36
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Joe Riel writes:
>> A rubber inner-tube filled with water, on the other hand, is going
>> to be squishing a lot of water around as it rolls, and the mass of
>> the water will be swirling uselessly, so there will be more drag.
> The two times I had to do this, I cannot say I noticed any
> difference in drag. Or otherwise. This was on the Moulton, which
> has full suspension, so that would have masked some of the effects.
There is little motion in the fluid in a tire because it only changes
shape slightly at the contact area. It is not pumping. I filled my
front tire with water to test the concept that shimmy is affected by
the mass of the wheel. It had no effect on shimmy nor could I feel
that it was full of water while riding.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 12:15:37
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:09:20 -0700, Joe Riel <joer@san.rr.com > wrote:
>carlfogel@comcast.net writes:
>
>> A rubber inner-tube filled with water, on the other hand, is going to
>> be squishing a lot of water around as it rolls, and the mass of the
>> water will be swirling uselessly, so there will be more drag.
>
>The two times I had to do this, I cannot say I noticed any difference
>in drag. Or otherwise. This was on the Moulton, which has full
>suspension, so that would have masked some of the effects.
Dear Joe,
Interesting--I just fooled around with a calculator a bit to see what
the practical effect might be.
Even a large increase in rolling resistance will barely show up in the
top speed recorded coasting downhill on a good cyclocomputer,
according to this calculator:
http://austinimage.com/bp/velocityN/velocity.html
If you zero watts and roll both bikes down the same -6% grade, they
reach 53.775 km/h.
Raise the rolling resistance 50% from 0.0050 to 0.0075, and the bike
with squashier tires drops to 52.539 km/h, only 1.236 km/h slower,
about a 2% speed change. In other words, the top coasting speed would
drop to 28.37 mph from 29.04 mph, a difference that no one is likely
to notice without the help of microchips.
For a 10% speed change down that hill, you need to raise the rolling
resistance to about three times the original 0.0050, up to about
0.0150--and that's still just dropping about 3 mph from about 30 mph.
I'm trying to resist the urge to fill a spare front wheel with water
and roll down my daily highway descent a few times.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 19:20:08
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Carl Fogel writes:
>>> A rubber inner-tube filled with water, on the other hand, is going to
>>> be squishing a lot of water around as it rolls, and the mass of the
>>> water will be swirling uselessly, so there will be more drag.
>> The two times I had to do this, I cannot say I noticed any
>> difference in drag. Or otherwise. This was on the Moulton, which
>> has full suspension, so that would have masked some of the effects.
> Interesting--I just fooled around with a calculator a bit to see
> what the practical effect might be.
> Even a large increase in rolling resistance will barely show up in
> the top speed recorded coasting downhill on a good cyclocomputer,
> according to this calculator:
http://austinimage.com/bp/velocityN/velocity.html
> If you zero watts and roll both bikes down the same -6% grade, they
> reach 53.775 km/h.
> Raise the rolling resistance 50% from 0.0050 to 0.0075, and the bike
> with squashier tires drops to 52.539 km/h, only 1.236 km/h slower,
> about a 2% speed change. In other words, the top coasting speed
> would drop to 28.37 mph from 29.04 mph, a difference that no one is
> likely to notice without the help of microchips.
> For a 10% speed change down that hill, you need to raise the rolling
> resistance to about three times the original 0.0050, up to about
> 0.0150--and that's still just dropping about 3 mph from about 30
> mph.
> I'm trying to resist the urge to fill a spare front wheel with water
> and roll down my daily highway descent a few times.
When you do that, make sure to let all the air out as the tire gets
near full. With the valve at the top and press down on the tire flat
against the inflation stem so there is no higher space for the air to
rise above the water. Pushing down on the WHEEL in this position
should ultimately squirt only water out of the Presta valve. Then
fill the tire the rest of the way to full.
I used my Silca frame fit pump for that task because it is easy to
fill with water and has a large enough volume to make it a relatively
quick job. It doesn't take nearly as many strokes as filling the tire
with air.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 11:56:13
From: Kerry Montgomery
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:tbghi3d97b6tf9v05f4oa41h1cilcaqhrn@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:09:20 -0700, Joe Riel <joer@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>carlfogel@comcast.net writes:
>>
>>> A rubber inner-tube filled with water, on the other hand, is going to
>>> be squishing a lot of water around as it rolls, and the mass of the
>>> water will be swirling uselessly, so there will be more drag.
>>
>>The two times I had to do this, I cannot say I noticed any difference
>>in drag. Or otherwise. This was on the Moulton, which has full
>>suspension, so that would have masked some of the effects.
>
> Dear Joe,
>
> Interesting--I just fooled around with a calculator a bit to see what
> the practical effect might be.
>
> Even a large increase in rolling resistance will barely show up in the
> top speed recorded coasting downhill on a good cyclocomputer,
> according to this calculator:
>
> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocityN/velocity.html
>
> If you zero watts and roll both bikes down the same -6% grade, they
> reach 53.775 km/h.
>
> Raise the rolling resistance 50% from 0.0050 to 0.0075, and the bike
> with squashier tires drops to 52.539 km/h, only 1.236 km/h slower,
> about a 2% speed change. In other words, the top coasting speed would
> drop to 28.37 mph from 29.04 mph, a difference that no one is likely
> to notice without the help of microchips.
>
> For a 10% speed change down that hill, you need to raise the rolling
> resistance to about three times the original 0.0050, up to about
> 0.0150--and that's still just dropping about 3 mph from about 30 mph.
>
> I'm trying to resist the urge to fill a spare front wheel with water
> and roll down my daily highway descent a few times.
>
Carl,
I thought you might be resisting the urge to completely fill both your tires
with Slime and see how they deal with the goatheads!
Kerry
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 20:08:44
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Diablo Scott writes:
>
>>>> I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving
>>>> my bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of
>>>> time. Is this normal?
>
>>> You may have noticed that toy balloons also lose pressure in a short
>>> time. They being thinner skinned than bicycle inner tubes are also
>>> more permeable and go flat even faster by the same mechanism.
>
>> The gas used to fill most helium balloons is a mixture of helium and
>> other (heavier) gases, the mixture of which has a specific gravity low
>> enough to provide sufficient buoyancy at a more economical price than
>> pure helium.
>
>> The helium though diffuses through the latex balloon at a higher rate
>> than the other gases, for whatever reason, and that's why a day-old
>> balloon with half the original gas volume has so much less buoyancy than
>> a half filled new balloon with fresh gas.
>
> I think I hear not right! Where did you see helium mentioned in what
> I wrote. Maybe the modern child never inflated a balloon my blowing
> into it. That's too bad. Breath inflated balloons go flat much
> faster than a bicycle tire and from a far lower pressure.
because of the permeability of /what/ gas???
>
> Lets not get permeability, solubility, diffusion and partial pressures
> of gas molecules into this.
why not? does science gets in the way of ability to bullshit?
> Thin rubber membranes are not gas proof.
no, they're "p-e-r-m-e-a-b-l-e".
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 19:57:17
From: William Bikash
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Jobst Brant said:
Lets not get permeability, solubility, diffusion and partial pressures
of gas molecules into this. Thin rubber membranes are not gas proof.
I love all the info when the engineers get into a subject, But nobody
said what happens to the water vapor that's part of air when it's in the
inner tube.Just curious.
Bill
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 20:06:16
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
William Bikash wrote:
> Jobst Brant said:
> Lets not get permeability, solubility, diffusion and partial pressures
> of gas molecules into this. Thin rubber membranes are not gas proof.
>
> I love all the info when the engineers get into a subject,
except that engineers are not chemists. and some engineers apparently
have no ability to look up basic physical data from text books.
> But nobody
> said what happens to the water vapor that's part of air when it's in the
> inner tube.Just curious.
it's a gas fraction, just like the other air constituents. it permeates
the rubber in proportion to the atmospheric moisture content.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 01:24:37
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
William Bikash writes:
> Lets not get permeability, solubility, diffusion and partial
> pressures of gas molecules into this. Thin rubber membranes are not
> gas proof.
> I love all the info when the engineers get into a subject, But
> nobody said what happens to the water vapor that's part of air when
> it's in the inner tube.Just curious.
It's gas, so to speak, and leaks out wit the rest of the mixture.
By the way, moist air is lighter than dry air.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 03 Nov 2007 03:39:07
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
whaddya mean "far longer" 9 months? 12 minutes? 35 seconds?
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Nov 2007 06:19:42
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>
> whaddya mean "far longer" 9 months? 12 minutes? 35 seconds?
>
Four (4) minutes, thirty-three (33) seconds.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Nov 2007 13:15:57
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Just figured the connection between flat tires and the guy arrested
for having sex with his bike. He was just trying to create a home grown
leak sealant. Hope his bike doesn't have Presta tubes !!!
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 02:21:06
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote: (clip) By the way, moist air is
lighter than dry air.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So if you don't have hydrogen or helium available, always fill your tires on
a humid day.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 09:57:33
From: Mike
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article <mywVi.298645$ax1.282351@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >, l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net says...
>
> <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote: (clip) By the way, moist air is
> lighter than dry air.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> So if you don't have hydrogen or helium available, always fill your tires on
> a humid day.
>
Better still - just _fill_ the suckers with water. Provides a nice hard ride with the added benefit of being able to
find leaks instantly by observing the spurt of water squirting out through the smallest of pin-hole.
Mike
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 21:11:38
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Mike Fee writes:
>>> By the way, moist air is lighter than dry air.
>> So if you don't have hydrogen or helium available, always fill your
>> tires on a humid day.
> Better still - just _fill_ the suckers with water. Provides a nice
> hard ride with the added benefit of being able to find leaks
> instantly by observing the spurt of water squirting out through the
> smallest of pin-hole.
Not to laugh, filling a tire with water works well and isn't as hard
as you think. The only problem is that the tire is heavier. If you
have a slow leak and nothing with which to fix it on the road, fill
the tire with water. I've done it and it works like a charm. Of
course you have to have a good frame fit pump (long stroke Silca) that
can be filled with water. Make sure to let out all remaining air so
the water doesn't slosh around.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:30:33
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> Mike Fee writes:
>
>>>> By the way, moist air is lighter than dry air.
>
>>> So if you don't have hydrogen or helium available, always fill your
>>> tires on a humid day.
>
>> Better still - just _fill_ the suckers with water. Provides a nice
>> hard ride with the added benefit of being able to find leaks
>> instantly by observing the spurt of water squirting out through the
>> smallest of pin-hole.
>
> Not to laugh, filling a tire with water works well and isn't as hard
> as you think. The only problem is that the tire is heavier. If you
> have a slow leak and nothing with which to fix it on the road, fill
> the tire with water. I've done it and it works like a charm. Of
> course you have to have a good frame fit pump (long stroke Silca) that
> can be filled with water. Make sure to let out all remaining air so
> the water doesn't slosh around.
I thought Jobst preferred milk to water? See
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/c1a9f571ffd02438?dmode=source >.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 14:03:52
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Tom Sherman writes:
>>>>> By the way, moist air is lighter than dry air.
>>>> So if you don't have hydrogen or helium available, always fill
>>>> your tires on a humid day.
>>> Better still - just _fill_ the suckers with water. Provides a nice
>>> hard ride with the added benefit of being able to find leaks
>>> instantly by observing the spurt of water squirting out through
>>> the smallest of pin-hole.
>> Not to laugh, filling a tire with water works well and isn't as
>> hard as you think. The only problem is that the tire is heavier.
>> If you have a slow leak and nothing with which to fix it on the
>> road, fill the tire with water. I've done it and it works like a
>> charm. Of course you have to have a good frame fit pump (long
>> stroke Silca) that can be filled with water. Make sure to let out
>> all remaining air so the water doesn't slosh around.
> I thought Jobst preferred milk to water? See:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/c1a9f571ffd02438?dmode=source
That's a different problem and it only takes a small shot of whole
milk *with fat) to work as a slow leak plugger. The water (board)
fill is a different event.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 05:33:41
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
"Tom Sherman" wrote: When did ignorance of biology become a "family
value"?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
When the pro-life people started hi-jacking our science teaching.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:41:25
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Leo Lichtman wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" wrote: When did ignorance of biology become a "family
> value"?
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> When the pro-life people started hi-jacking our science teaching.
ROTFL
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 17:15:14
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On 2007-10-30, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote:
> Mike Fee writes:
>
>>>> By the way, moist air is lighter than dry air.
>
>>> So if you don't have hydrogen or helium available, always fill your
>>> tires on a humid day.
>
>> Better still - just _fill_ the suckers with water. Provides a nice
>> hard ride with the added benefit of being able to find leaks
>> instantly by observing the spurt of water squirting out through the
>> smallest of pin-hole.
>
> Not to laugh, filling a tire with water works well and isn't as hard
> as you think. The only problem is that the tire is heavier. If you
> have a slow leak and nothing with which to fix it on the road, fill
> the tire with water. I've done it and it works like a charm. Of
> course you have to have a good frame fit pump (long stroke Silca) that
> can be filled with water. Make sure to let out all remaining air so
> the water doesn't slosh around.
Although if it does slosh around you have the basis of a dynamical
automatic 3D wheel-balancer.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5503464-description.html
Perhaps a narrow tube 1/4 filled with fluid threaded in the space
between the two walls of the rim (you'd need one without sockets) would
be beneficial.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 22:01:42
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote: Not to laugh, filling a tire with
water works well and isn't as hard
> as you think. The only problem is that the tire is heavier. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Seems this might form the basis of an experiment to settle the
discussion/argument about the importance of the rotational inertia of the
wheels during acceleration. Carl Fogel, are you listening? I also suggest
coasting tests, in which the distance from a mark to a stop is measured,
with and without water.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 17:40:34
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 22:01:42 GMT, "Leo Lichtman"
<l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net > wrote:
>
><jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote: Not to laugh, filling a tire with
>water works well and isn't as hard
>> as you think. The only problem is that the tire is heavier. (clip)
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Seems this might form the basis of an experiment to settle the
>discussion/argument about the importance of the rotational inertia of the
>wheels during acceleration. Carl Fogel, are you listening? I also suggest
>coasting tests, in which the distance from a mark to a stop is measured,
>with and without water.
Dear Leo,
It's the _relative_ ratio of ordinary to light wheels that makes the
difference in acceleration trivial (plus where the mass sits, meaning
close to the axle or out at the rim).
Obviously, a pair of lead wheels weighing 50 pounds would be hard to
spin up--and hard to slow down.
Given a theoretical pair of 210 cm wheels with 2.54 cm of space
inside, we have a volume of about 2 * 210 * ((2.54/2)^2 * 3.141 )cm^3
of water, or 2,128 cc's of water, about 2.2 kg, all out at the rim and
in addition to the air-inflated weight of the same wheelset.
In other words, you'd be adding a full 32 ounce water bottle to each
wheel. This 2,178 grams is about ten times the usual 200 gram savings
gained from lighter tires and rims, so it's about ten times as
noticeable--which is still not much, given that it's only about 2% of
a 100 kg rider and bicycle.
A real-world coasting test that tries to distinguish 2~4% differences
is unlikely to come up with clear answers, particularly since the
rolling resistance of the water-filled tires is likely to be
considerably larger than the air-filled tires.
Compressed air is an almost perfect spring, so the tire drag for an
inflated tire is mostly from the hysteresis of the sidewalls and
tread, which fail to spring back with the same force that they're
deformed.
A rubber inner-tube filled with water, on the other hand, is going to
be squishing a lot of water around as it rolls, and the mass of the
water will be swirling uselessly, so there will be more drag.
You can go back to the thread a few years ago where I tested the
spin-down times for a rear tire with and without a few ounces of
slime:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/c9ba3e288c0f28d4/cb76085614097330?lnk=gst&q=carl+slime+spindown#cb76085614097330
Here's the graph of the time to spin down from the same speeds for the
tire with an air-tube, with a few ounces of slime in the tube, and
with a little extra weight on an air-tube to see the differences:
http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/slime.jpg
The heavier tube-and-tire combinations both took longer to spin down,
proving that Newton was on to something.
The slime tube and the air-tube with 80 grams of weight added may not
have been exactly the same weight, so it's unwise to draw any
conclusions except that they were pretty close.
The interesting thing was that the times for the slime-filled tube
varied less over the 20 tests than the times for the air-filled tubes.
That test, of course, had no tire-drag factor, unlike a coasting
contest. The tires just spun down against the wind drag of the spokes,
descending to a starting speed and then on down to a low cut-off
speed.
As I recall, I couldn't tell the difference between any of the tires
when cranking the rear wheel up to over 30 mph with one hand.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 20:11:46
From: William Bikash
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Sorry about the misspelling:
"Jobst Brandt"
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 07:20:54
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Oct 28, 7:06 am, snowsm...@gmail.com wrote:
> I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving my
> bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of time. Is
> this normal?
>
> Youssef Eldakar
http://tinyurl.com/2l7q5b
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 08:00:32
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
snowsmash@gmail.com aka Youssef Eldakar wrote:
> I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving my
> bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of time. Is
> this normal?
Yes, the inner tube rubber is NOT completely impermeable.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 03:05:10
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
less squeezing from frozen rubbah?
|
| | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 14:37:00
From: mike.a.schwab@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Oct 28, 9:07 am, dsm...@hotmail.com (William Bikash) wrote:
> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
> Bill
http://www.wellworthproducts.com/tech-articles/12.html
has a good description. Of course bicycle tires rarely get up to
driving speeds, usually have an inner tube separating the Nitrogen
from the tire casing. Due to bicycle tires having much less surface
area and much much less volume topping off is needed more frequently.
|
| | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 10:07:54
From: William Bikash
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
Bill
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 04:46:02
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<7170-472497BA-862@storefull-3134.bay.webtv.net >,
dsm151@hotmail.com (William Bikash) wrote:
> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
I keep a pressure tank of N2 and inflate my bicycle
tires with it. I have not noticed any difference
from ambient air. I do it because I am too lazy
to pump tires with a hand pump.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 18:49:13
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:07:54 -0400, dsm151@hotmail.com (William
Bikash) wrote:
> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
>to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
>on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
> Bill
Dear Bill,
Just a quibble, but the solubility of the gas in the rubber inner tube
has little to do with the "size" of the molecule.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/dc965387cab3e96e
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 12:12:10
From: William Bikash
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Hi,
Carl Fogel said:
Just a quibble, but the solubility of the gas in the rubber inner tube
has little to do with the "size" of the molecule.
I'm seeing terms like solubility, permeability and diffusion and I'm
not sure what they all mean. But Michael Press stated that he saw no
difference between N2 and air in his experiment. At least that's a
practical test from his experience.
The real problem may be finding tubes that have no tiny leaks, only
"normal" permeability, Then test with air and then with N2 and as Tom
Sherman jokingly suggested, Helium. And of course no one has mentioned
what effect temperature has on permeability(solubility, diffusion?) of
inner tubes. And don't dare to actually ride with these test tubes which
will screw up the test with potential leaks!
Did some one mention Hydrogen? A rubber bladder with some type of
metallic sealant coating ALMOST worked for the
Hindenburg!
Bill
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 10:57:28
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 12:12:10 -0400, dsm151@hotmail.com (William
Bikash) wrote:
>Hi,
> Carl Fogel said:
>Just a quibble, but the solubility of the gas in the rubber inner tube
>has little to do with the "size" of the molecule.
>
> I'm seeing terms like solubility, permeability and diffusion and I'm
>not sure what they all mean. But Michael Press stated that he saw no
>difference between N2 and air in his experiment. At least that's a
>practical test from his experience.
> The real problem may be finding tubes that have no tiny leaks, only
>"normal" permeability, Then test with air and then with N2 and as Tom
>Sherman jokingly suggested, Helium. And of course no one has mentioned
>what effect temperature has on permeability(solubility, diffusion?) of
>inner tubes. And don't dare to actually ride with these test tubes which
>will screw up the test with potential leaks!
> Did some one mention Hydrogen? A rubber bladder with some type of
>metallic sealant coating ALMOST worked for the
>Hindenburg!
>Bill
Dear William,
Nitrogen from a tank is 100% N2, diffusing through rubber at a rate of
about 10.
Air from a tire pump is 80% N2, with 20% O2 diffusing at a rate of
about 23.
So the relative deflation rates would be 10 versus 12.6, hard to
distinguish over a week or two.
CO2, however, diffuses through rubber at a rate of about 150, which
makes it easy to notice that cartridge-inflated tires go flat quickly.
As for metallic sealing, that's why more expensive children's balloons
have the shiny metal foil--even that thin metal coating keeps them
inflated much longer.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 20:10:54
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 12:12:10 -0400, dsm151@hotmail.com (William
> Bikash) wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> Carl Fogel said:
>> Just a quibble, but the solubility of the gas in the rubber inner tube
>> has little to do with the "size" of the molecule.
>>
>> I'm seeing terms like solubility, permeability and diffusion and I'm
>> not sure what they all mean. But Michael Press stated that he saw no
>> difference between N2 and air in his experiment. At least that's a
>> practical test from his experience.
>> The real problem may be finding tubes that have no tiny leaks, only
>> "normal" permeability, Then test with air and then with N2 and as Tom
>> Sherman jokingly suggested, Helium. And of course no one has mentioned
>> what effect temperature has on permeability(solubility, diffusion?) of
>> inner tubes. And don't dare to actually ride with these test tubes which
>> will screw up the test with potential leaks!
>> Did some one mention Hydrogen? A rubber bladder with some type of
>> metallic sealant coating ALMOST worked for the
>> Hindenburg!
>> Bill
>
> Dear William,
>
> Nitrogen from a tank is 100% N2, diffusing through rubber at a rate of
> about 10.
>
> Air from a tire pump is 80% N2, with 20% O2 diffusing at a rate of
> about 23.
>
> So the relative deflation rates would be 10 versus 12.6, hard to
> distinguish over a week or two.
>
> CO2, however, diffuses through rubber at a rate of about 150, which
> makes it easy to notice that cartridge-inflated tires go flat quickly.
>
> As for metallic sealing, that's why more expensive children's balloons
> have the shiny metal foil--even that thin metal coating keeps them
> inflated much longer.
indeed.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 14:10:50
From: Matt O'Toole
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:07:54 -0400, William Bikash wrote:
> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
It's true, and it's why car and truck air shocks and tires are filled
with nitrogen at the factory. Not everyone uses nitrogen for tires, but
some carmakers do, and their dealers as well.
I have no idea how much less a tire will leak when filled with nitrogen
though. Anyone with a nitrogen tank (such as for welding) want to
experiment?
Matt O.
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 04:48:50
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<pan.2007.10.28.18.10.48.307917@letterboxes.org >,
Matt O'Toole <mattotoole@letterboxes.org > wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:07:54 -0400, William Bikash wrote:
>
> > Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> > dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> > to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> > on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
>
> It's true, and it's why car and truck air shocks and tires are filled
> with nitrogen at the factory. Not everyone uses nitrogen for tires, but
> some carmakers do, and their dealers as well.
>
> I have no idea how much less a tire will leak when filled with nitrogen
> though. Anyone with a nitrogen tank (such as for welding) want to
> experiment?
I do not have accurate numbers. I inflate my tires to
115-120 psi with N2. After about three weeks they are
about 90 psi. As far as I know there is no difference
from pumping atmosphere into tires.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 14:34:36
From: Peter Cole
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <pan.2007.10.28.18.10.48.307917@letterboxes.org>,
> Matt O'Toole <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:07:54 -0400, William Bikash wrote:
>>
>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
>>> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
>>> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
>> It's true, and it's why car and truck air shocks and tires are filled
>> with nitrogen at the factory. Not everyone uses nitrogen for tires, but
>> some carmakers do, and their dealers as well.
>>
>> I have no idea how much less a tire will leak when filled with nitrogen
>> though. Anyone with a nitrogen tank (such as for welding) want to
>> experiment?
>
> I do not have accurate numbers. I inflate my tires to
> 115-120 psi with N2. After about three weeks they are
> about 90 psi. As far as I know there is no difference
> from pumping atmosphere into tires.
>
From:
http://www.dowcorning.com/content/rubber/rubberprop/rubber_perm.asp
permeability of butyl rubber:
N2 = 0.025
O2 = 0.098
Air = 0.02 (rounding?)
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 20:52:37
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Peter Cole wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
>> In article <pan.2007.10.28.18.10.48.307917@letterboxes.org>,
>> Matt O'Toole <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:07:54 -0400, William Bikash wrote:
>>>
>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
>>>> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
>>>> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
>>> It's true, and it's why car and truck air shocks and tires are filled
>>> with nitrogen at the factory. Not everyone uses nitrogen for tires, but
>>> some carmakers do, and their dealers as well.
>>>
>>> I have no idea how much less a tire will leak when filled with nitrogen
>>> though. Anyone with a nitrogen tank (such as for welding) want to
>>> experiment?
>>
>> I do not have accurate numbers. I inflate my tires to
>> 115-120 psi with N2. After about three weeks they are
>> about 90 psi. As far as I know there is no difference
>> from pumping atmosphere into tires.
>>
>
> From:
>
> http://www.dowcorning.com/content/rubber/rubberprop/rubber_perm.asp
>
> permeability of butyl rubber:
>
> N2 = 0.025
>
> O2 = 0.098
>
> Air = 0.02 (rounding?)
>
Interesting how much more permeable natural rubber is than butyl rubber.
No wonder latex tubes hold air so poorly.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 22:49:13
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<U9udnbRjIIWkgbfanZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d@comcast.com >,
Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <pan.2007.10.28.18.10.48.307917@letterboxes.org>,
> > Matt O'Toole <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:07:54 -0400, William Bikash wrote:
> >>
> >>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> >>> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> >>> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
> >> It's true, and it's why car and truck air shocks and tires are filled
> >> with nitrogen at the factory. Not everyone uses nitrogen for tires, but
> >> some carmakers do, and their dealers as well.
> >>
> >> I have no idea how much less a tire will leak when filled with nitrogen
> >> though. Anyone with a nitrogen tank (such as for welding) want to
> >> experiment?
> >
> > I do not have accurate numbers. I inflate my tires to
> > 115-120 psi with N2. After about three weeks they are
> > about 90 psi. As far as I know there is no difference
> > from pumping atmosphere into tires.
> >
>
> From:
>
> http://www.dowcorning.com/content/rubber/rubberprop/rubber_perm.asp
>
> permeability of butyl rubber:
>
> N2 = 0.025
>
> O2 = 0.098
>
> Air = 0.02 (rounding?)
Thanks. This is measurable, but I am not capable of noticing
the difference.
Another interesting effect is the leaking of O2 _into_
a tube inflated with pure N2. This will increase the
time that a tire remains inflated above a set value, p,
when inflated above p.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 18:06:08
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On 2007-11-01, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article
><U9udnbRjIIWkgbfanZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote:
[...]
>> http://www.dowcorning.com/content/rubber/rubberprop/rubber_perm.asp
>>
>> permeability of butyl rubber:
>>
>> N2 = 0.025
>>
>> O2 = 0.098
>>
>> Air = 0.02 (rounding?)
>
> Thanks. This is measurable, but I am not capable of noticing
> the difference.
>
> Another interesting effect is the leaking of O2 _into_
> a tube inflated with pure N2. This will increase the
> time that a tire remains inflated above a set value, p,
> when inflated above p.
That is an interesting effect. Since the tyre is more permeable to O2
than to N2, could it actually reach a higher pressure than what you
originally pumped it up to?
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 00:33:17
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<slrnfikn0f.tco.spamspam@bowser.marioworld >,
Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-11-01, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> ><U9udnbRjIIWkgbfanZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> http://www.dowcorning.com/content/rubber/rubberprop/rubber_perm.asp
> >>
> >> permeability of butyl rubber:
> >>
> >> N2 = 0.025
> >>
> >> O2 = 0.098
> >>
> >> Air = 0.02 (rounding?)
> >
> > Thanks. This is measurable, but I am not capable of noticing
> > the difference.
> >
> > Another interesting effect is the leaking of O2 _into_
> > a tube inflated with pure N2. This will increase the
> > time that a tire remains inflated above a set value, p,
> > when inflated above p.
>
> That is an interesting effect. Since the tyre is more permeable to O2
> than to N2, could it actually reach a higher pressure than what you
> originally pumped it up to?
Unlikely. I have not done the arithmetic.
The O2 wants in with 1/5 bar behind it.
The N2 wants out with 8 bar behind it.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 22:18:01
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
"Matt O'Toole" wrote: (clip) Anyone with a nitrogen tank (such as for
welding) want to experiment?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The only place I have seen nitrogen used as a welding gas is at a local
bronze foundry. Large sculptures are cast in pieces, and welded together
using nitrogen as a shielding gas. If I decide to have a bicycle frame cast
in bronze, I will ask them to fill the frame with nitrogen. If I have the
whole bicycle cast, I will have them fill the tires with nitrogen.
This may not happen rght away, though.
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 11:09:36
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On 2007-10-28, William Bikash <dsm151@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
> Bill
See:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/5219a446a2fba34c/d10bc31f9ed4fd02?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#d10bc31f9ed4fd02
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 13:05:51
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
See:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/5219a446a2fba34c/d10bc31f9ed4fd02?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#d10bc31f9ed4fd02
So according to the above thread if you keep refilling the tire with
air and the oxygen diffuses at a higher rate,then the nitrogen
percentage increases. How does the water vapor factor into this
diffusion. Does the WV stay or go out with the oxygen or do its own
thing?
So if some auto buff sells his classic car and says it has original air
in the tires he may not be completely lying!!!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 17:47:13
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On 2007-10-28, jbm151@webtv.net <jbm151@webtv.net > wrote:
> See:
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/5219a446a2fba34c/d10bc31f9ed4fd02?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#d10bc31f9ed4fd02
>
> So according to the above thread if you keep refilling the tire with
> air and the oxygen diffuses at a higher rate,then the nitrogen
> percentage increases.
That's the idea, but it only works if it's true that the gas is really
diffusing through the rubber in that fashion. If it's leaking out of
small holes as someone suggested in that thread (might have been jim
beam) then it's presumably coming out just as air mixed in the normal
ratios.
But then if it is leaking out of small holes, there's not much point
filling it with nitrogen.
And if it is diffusing out oxygen-first, then Mark Hickey should be
right-- topping up with air should leave the contents of the tyre
nitrogen-rich.
A crude experiment ought to be possible. You could top up a tyre several
times, then draw off some of the air (bubble it up underwater into some
kind of jar, if I remember anything from chemistry lessons), then see if
a lighted splint goes out when inserted into the upended jar. If it does
it means there's no oxygen. If it blows up in your face it means your
tyres were filled with hydrogen and oxygen.
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 10:57:42
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
William Bikash wrote:
> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
weight-weenie crowd.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 21:01:05
From: Kinky Cowboy
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:57:42 -0500, Tom Sherman
<sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
>William Bikash wrote:
>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
>> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
>> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
>
>I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>weight-weenie crowd.
Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex tubes
means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for road bikes
used for several hours at a time.
It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper nitrogen,
but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams think they're
using helium.
Kinky Cowboy*
*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 01:07:04
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<suhci3dtkc50khenpp0gh45apfeh7l23gf@4ax.com >,
Kinky Cowboy <user@domain.com > wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:57:42 -0500, Tom Sherman
> <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >William Bikash wrote:
> >> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown due
> >> to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation ane less corrosion
> >> on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor and oxygen.
> >
> >I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
> >weight-weenie crowd.
>
> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex tubes
> means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for road bikes
> used for several hours at a time.
>
> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper nitrogen,
> but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams think they're
> using helium.
The only advantage accrued by inflating tires with N2 is
to racing cars where the pure gas has more predictable
behavior with changes in temperature; more predictable
than the variable mix emitted by an atmospheric air compressor.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 21:35:20
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Someone writes:
>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>> and oxygen.
>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>> weight-weenie crowd.
> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
> think they're using helium.
Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
montomic molecule.
2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2524493
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 01:16:59
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net >,
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Someone writes:
>
> >>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
> >>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
> >>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
> >>> and oxygen.
>
> >> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
> >> weight-weenie crowd.
>
> > Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> > very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
> > tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
> > road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>
> > It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> > nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
> > think they're using helium.
>
> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
> montomic molecule.
>
> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
He 4.003
Ne 20.18
Ar 39.95
Kr 83.80
Xe 131.3
Ra 226
(Do not worry about the decimal places.)
Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
that of H2.
SF6 (sulfur hexafluoride) weighs in at 144.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 20:48:35
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
>> Someone writes:
>>
>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
>>> think they're using helium.
>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
>> montomic molecule.
>>
>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>
> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>
> He 4.003
> Ne 20.18
> Ar 39.95
> Kr 83.80
> Xe 131.3
> Ra 226
>
> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
> that of H2.
yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>
> SF6 (sulfur hexafluoride) weighs in at 144.
>
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 21:20:59
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> > jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >
> >> Someone writes:
> >>
> >>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
> >>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
> >>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
> >>>>> and oxygen.
> >>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
> >>>> weight-weenie crowd.
> >>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> >>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
> >>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
> >>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> >>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> >>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
> >>> think they're using helium.
> >> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
> >> montomic molecule.
> >>
> >> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
> >
> > What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> > MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
> >
> > He 4.003
> > Ne 20.18
> > Ar 39.95
> > Kr 83.80
> > Xe 131.3
> > Ra 226
> >
> > (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> > Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
> > This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
> > that of H2.
>
> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
How big is the H2 molecule,
and how big is the He atom?
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 21:37:31
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>
>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>
>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>
>>> He 4.003
>>> Ne 20.18
>>> Ar 39.95
>>> Kr 83.80
>>> Xe 131.3
>>> Ra 226
>>>
>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
>>> that of H2.
>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>
> How big is the H2 molecule,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
> and how big is the He atom?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Oct 2007 22:03:42
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> >>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Someone writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
> >>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
> >>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
> >>>>>>> and oxygen.
> >>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
> >>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
> >>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> >>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
> >>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
> >>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> >>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> >>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
> >>>>> think they're using helium.
> >>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
> >>>> montomic molecule.
> >>>>
> >>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
> >>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> >>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
> >>>
> >>> He 4.003
> >>> Ne 20.18
> >>> Ar 39.95
> >>> Kr 83.80
> >>> Xe 131.3
> >>> Ra 226
> >>>
> >>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> >>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
> >>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
> >>> that of H2.
> >> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
> >> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
> >
> > How big is the H2 molecule,
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>
> > and how big is the He atom?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
So, how big are they?
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 05:43:35
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
>>>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>>>
>>>>> He 4.003
>>>>> Ne 20.18
>>>>> Ar 39.95
>>>>> Kr 83.80
>>>>> Xe 131.3
>>>>> Ra 226
>>>>>
>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
>>>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
>>>>> that of H2.
>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
>>>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>>
>>> and how big is the He atom?
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>
> So, how big are they?
>
what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library of
chem text books not working for you? or do you have some other agenda?
if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's on your mind.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 12:03:09
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article
> >>> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> >>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Someone writes:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
> >>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
> >>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
> >>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
> >>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
> >>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
> >>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> >>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
> >>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
> >>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> >>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> >>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
> >>>>>>> think they're using helium.
> >>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
> >>>>>> montomic molecule.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
> >>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> >>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> He 4.003
> >>>>> Ne 20.18
> >>>>> Ar 39.95
> >>>>> Kr 83.80
> >>>>> Xe 131.3
> >>>>> Ra 226
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> >>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
> >>>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
> >>>>> that of H2.
> >>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
> >>>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
> >>> How big is the H2 molecule,
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
> >>
> >>> and how big is the He atom?
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
> >
> > So, how big are they?
>
> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library of
> chem text books not working for you? or do you have some other agenda?
> if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's on your mind.
You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 20:36:10
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He 4.003
>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
>>>>>>> Xe 131.3
>>>>>>> Ra 226
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
>>>>>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
>>>>>>> that of H2.
>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
>>>>>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>>>>
>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>>> So, how big are they?
>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library of
>> chem text books not working for you? or do you have some other agenda?
>> if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's on your mind.
>
> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
>
eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of scientific
texts. if you think you can contradict published science data, go right
ahead!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:11:49
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article
> >>> <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>> In article
> >>>>> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> >>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
> >>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
> >>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
> >>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
> >>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
> >>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
> >>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> >>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
> >>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
> >>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> >>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> >>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
> >>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
> >>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
> >>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
> >>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> >>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> He 4.003
> >>>>>>> Ne 20.18
> >>>>>>> Ar 39.95
> >>>>>>> Kr 83.80
> >>>>>>> Xe 131.3
> >>>>>>> Ra 226
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> >>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
> >>>>>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
> >>>>>>> that of H2.
> >>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
> >>>>>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
> >>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
> >>>>
> >>>>> and how big is the He atom?
> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
> >>> So, how big are they?
> >> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library of
> >> chem text books not working for you? or do you have some other agenda?
> >> if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's on your mind.
> >
> > You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
> > the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
> > It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
> >
>
> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of scientific
> texts. if you think you can contradict published science data, go right
> ahead!
What is the size of an H2 molecule?
What is the size of an He atom?
It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
to go click the link an search for the data
when you could write the numbers here for
everybody to read. Publish the numbers and
cite your references as others do.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 05:33:40
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
"Michael Press" wrote: (clip)Publish the numbers and
> cite your references as others do.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A hydrogen atom consists of one proton in the nucleus, with one electron
orbiting around it. A hydrogen molecule consists of a pair of hydrogen
atoms which complete their electron shells by sharing their electrons. A
helium atom consists of a nucleus with two protons, and two electrons
orbiting around it. Thus, they have the same molecular weight, but the
hydrogen molecule is approximately twice as large, because the protons are
not together in the same nucleus. The actual sizes do not need to be known
for this to be understood.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 02:51:36
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Leo Lichtman writes:
> A hydrogen atom consists of one proton in the nucleus, with one
> electron orbiting around it. A hydrogen molecule consists of a pair
> of hydrogen atoms which complete their electron shells by sharing
> their electrons. A helium atom consists of a nucleus with two
> protons, and two electrons orbiting around it. Thus, they have the
> same molecular weight, but the hydrogen molecule is approximately
> twice as large, because the protons are not together in the same
> nucleus. The actual sizes do not need to be known for this to be
> understood.
So what affects diffusion through an inner tube if it isn't given by
these parameters?
It has been my experience that in the days of latex tubes in Clement
tubular tires, cold weather allowed us to ride two days instead of
one after pumping to about 100psi on a bicycle tour.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 21:51:24
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Leo Lichtman writes:
>
>> A hydrogen atom consists of one proton in the nucleus, with one
>> electron orbiting around it. A hydrogen molecule consists of a pair
>> of hydrogen atoms which complete their electron shells by sharing
>> their electrons. A helium atom consists of a nucleus with two
>> protons, and two electrons orbiting around it. Thus, they have the
>> same molecular weight, but the hydrogen molecule is approximately
>> twice as large, because the protons are not together in the same
>> nucleus. The actual sizes do not need to be known for this to be
>> understood.
>
> So what affects diffusion through an inner tube if it isn't given by
> these parameters?
it sure as heck isn't atomic number of noble gases!!!
>
> It has been my experience that in the days of latex tubes in Clement
> tubular tires, cold weather allowed us to ride two days instead of
> one after pumping to about 100psi on a bicycle tour.
cute little story.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 11:40:44
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
> "Michael Press" wrote: (clip)Publish the numbers and
>> cite your references as others do.
Leo Lichtman wrote:
> A hydrogen atom consists of one proton in the nucleus, with one electron
> orbiting around it. A hydrogen molecule consists of a pair of hydrogen
> atoms which complete their electron shells by sharing their electrons. A
> helium atom consists of a nucleus with two protons, and two electrons
> orbiting around it. Thus, they have the same molecular weight, but the
> hydrogen molecule is approximately twice as large, because the protons are
> not together in the same nucleus. The actual sizes do not need to be known
> for this to be understood.
Thanks for a clear explanation.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:41:02
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<UydWi.40913$kj1.40569@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.n
et >,
"Leo Lichtman" <l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net > wrote:
> "Michael Press" wrote: (clip)Publish the numbers and
> > cite your references as others do.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> A hydrogen atom consists of one proton in the nucleus, with one electron
> orbiting around it. A hydrogen molecule consists of a pair of hydrogen
> atoms which complete their electron shells by sharing their electrons. A
> helium atom consists of a nucleus with two protons, and two electrons
> orbiting around it. Thus, they have the same molecular weight, but the
> hydrogen molecule is approximately twice as large, because the protons are
> not together in the same nucleus. The actual sizes do not need to be known
> for this to be understood.
Will _you_ publish some numbers.
In article
<Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:48:35
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <UydWi.40913$kj1.40569@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.n
> et>,
> "Leo Lichtman" <l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>> "Michael Press" wrote: (clip)Publish the numbers and
>>> cite your references as others do.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> A hydrogen atom consists of one proton in the nucleus, with one electron
>> orbiting around it. A hydrogen molecule consists of a pair of hydrogen
>> atoms which complete their electron shells by sharing their electrons. A
>> helium atom consists of a nucleus with two protons, and two electrons
>> orbiting around it. Thus, they have the same molecular weight, but the
>> hydrogen molecule is approximately twice as large, because the protons are
>> not together in the same nucleus. The actual sizes do not need to be known
>> for this to be understood.
>
> Will _you_ publish some numbers.
>
> In article
> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>
> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
>
what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 11:24:16
From: _
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Michael Press wrote:
> [...]
>>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
>>>
>>
>> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
>
> According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
> the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
> That's about 0.15nm.
>
> As for a Helium atom, this page:
> http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
> 0.1nm.
>
> So not much difference in size at all.
Yes, but what size are they in jim beam's world?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
[...]
>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
>>
>
> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
That's about 0.15nm.
As for a Helium atom, this page:
http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
0.1nm.
So not much difference in size at all.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 11:37:16
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
>On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Michael Press wrote:
>[...]
>>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
>>>
>>
>> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
>
>According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
>the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
>That's about 0.15nm.
>
>As for a Helium atom, this page:
>http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
>0.1nm.
>
>So not much difference in size at all.
Dear Ben,
The size of the molecules is as irrelevant as the quibbling.
The larger CO2 molecule escapes through butyl rubber at about ten
times the rate of the obviously smaller O2 molecule:
http://www2.dupont.com/Vamac/en_US/assets/downloads/vamac_gas_permeability.pdf
You can find some explanations here:
http://www.soarnol.com/eng/solution/solution060313.html
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 22:41:48
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<mg2ki31dlkmgod37jdapg2m3t8rhni742a@4ax.com >,
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
> >On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >[...]
> >>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
> >>>
> >>
> >> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
> >
> >According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
> >the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
> >That's about 0.15nm.
> >
> >As for a Helium atom, this page:
> >http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
> >0.1nm.
> >
> >So not much difference in size at all.
>
> Dear Ben,
>
> The size of the molecules is as irrelevant as the quibbling.
>
> The larger CO2 molecule escapes through butyl rubber at about ten
> times the rate of the obviously smaller O2 molecule:
What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
pressures < 8 bar for
1) H2
2) He
3) CO2
?
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 19:22:00
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:41:48 GMT, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net >
wrote:
>In article
><mg2ki31dlkmgod37jdapg2m3t8rhni742a@4ax.com>,
> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>>
>> >On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> >> Michael Press wrote:
>> >[...]
>> >>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
>> >
>> >According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
>> >the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
>> >That's about 0.15nm.
>> >
>> >As for a Helium atom, this page:
>> >http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
>> >0.1nm.
>> >
>> >So not much difference in size at all.
>>
>> Dear Ben,
>>
>> The size of the molecules is as irrelevant as the quibbling.
>>
>> The larger CO2 molecule escapes through butyl rubber at about ten
>> times the rate of the obviously smaller O2 molecule:
>
>What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
>pressures < 8 bar for
>
>1) H2
>2) He
>3) CO2
Dear Michael,
Why not look up the answers and tell us something?
The links have been posted several times.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 03:31:42
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<8quki3941kisabp6tcuv4aist42nmrhj60@4ax.com >,
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:41:48 GMT, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><mg2ki31dlkmgod37jdapg2m3t8rhni742a@4ax.com>,
> > carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >> >[...]
> >> >>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
> >> >
> >> >According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
> >> >the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
> >> >That's about 0.15nm.
> >> >
> >> >As for a Helium atom, this page:
> >> >http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
> >> >0.1nm.
> >> >
> >> >So not much difference in size at all.
> >>
> >> Dear Ben,
> >>
> >> The size of the molecules is as irrelevant as the quibbling.
> >>
> >> The larger CO2 molecule escapes through butyl rubber at about ten
> >> times the rate of the obviously smaller O2 molecule:
> >
> >What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
> >pressures < 8 bar for
> >
> >1) H2
> >2) He
> >3) CO2
>
> Why not look up the answers and tell us something?
It is your proposition. I am not here to do
your work for you.
> The links have been posted several times.
The discussion had been about H2 and He.
You brought the transport rate of CO2.
I propose that you provide the data.
You and jim beam want others to do
your and jim beam's research.
You have a proposition? Prove it.
What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
pressures < 8 bar for
1) H2
2) He
3) CO2
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 21:51:42
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <8quki3941kisabp6tcuv4aist42nmrhj60@4ax.com>,
> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:41:48 GMT, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <mg2ki31dlkmgod37jdapg2m3t8rhni742a@4ax.com>,
>>> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
>>>>> According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
>>>>> the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
>>>>> That's about 0.15nm.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for a Helium atom, this page:
>>>>> http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
>>>>> 0.1nm.
>>>>>
>>>>> So not much difference in size at all.
>>>> Dear Ben,
>>>>
>>>> The size of the molecules is as irrelevant as the quibbling.
>>>>
>>>> The larger CO2 molecule escapes through butyl rubber at about ten
>>>> times the rate of the obviously smaller O2 molecule:
>>> What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
>>> pressures < 8 bar for
>>>
>>> 1) H2
>>> 2) He
>>> 3) CO2
>> Why not look up the answers and tell us something?
>
> It is your proposition. I am not here to do
> your work for you.
you goddamned hypocrite!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>> The links have been posted several times.
>
> The discussion had been about H2 and He.
> You brought the transport rate of CO2.
> I propose that you provide the data.
> You and jim beam want others to do
> your and jim beam's research.
> You have a proposition? Prove it.
>
> What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
> pressures < 8 bar for
> 1) H2
> 2) He
> 3) CO2
>
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 21:49:03
From:
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 03:31:42 GMT, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net >
wrote:
>In article
><8quki3941kisabp6tcuv4aist42nmrhj60@4ax.com>,
> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:41:48 GMT, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article
>> ><mg2ki31dlkmgod37jdapg2m3t8rhni742a@4ax.com>,
>> > carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> >> >> Michael Press wrote:
>> >> >[...]
>> >> >>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
>> >> >
>> >> >According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
>> >> >the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
>> >> >That's about 0.15nm.
>> >> >
>> >> >As for a Helium atom, this page:
>> >> >http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
>> >> >0.1nm.
>> >> >
>> >> >So not much difference in size at all.
>> >>
>> >> Dear Ben,
>> >>
>> >> The size of the molecules is as irrelevant as the quibbling.
>> >>
>> >> The larger CO2 molecule escapes through butyl rubber at about ten
>> >> times the rate of the obviously smaller O2 molecule:
>> >
>> >What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
>> >pressures < 8 bar for
>> >
>> >1) H2
>> >2) He
>> >3) CO2
>>
>> Why not look up the answers and tell us something?
>
>It is your proposition. I am not here to do
>your work for you.
>
>> The links have been posted several times.
>
>The discussion had been about H2 and He.
>You brought the transport rate of CO2.
>I propose that you provide the data.
>You and jim beam want others to do
>your and jim beam's research.
>You have a proposition? Prove it.
>
>What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
>pressures < 8 bar for
>1) H2
>2) He
>3) CO2
Dear Michael,
Er, no, you haven't kept up with the discussion from the beginning, so
you hijacked it off-topic.
Look it up yourself--it would be a refreshing change for you to supply
something.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Nov 2007 04:17:48
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<of7li39f5r1hvpnk2nnkigdqm0icrgf524@4ax.com >,
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 03:31:42 GMT, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><8quki3941kisabp6tcuv4aist42nmrhj60@4ax.com>,
> > carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 22:41:48 GMT, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article
> >> ><mg2ki31dlkmgod37jdapg2m3t8rhni742a@4ax.com>,
> >> > carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:44:55 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On 2007-11-01, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >> >> >[...]
> >> >> >>> What are the sizes? What is "much larger"?
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> what's the matter michael? is your web browser broken?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size, H2 is
> >> >> >the smallest diatomic molecule and is roughly 1.48 Angstroms in length.
> >> >> >That's about 0.15nm.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >As for a Helium atom, this page:
> >> >> >http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/step0.html says it's 10-10m, which is
> >> >> >0.1nm.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >So not much difference in size at all.
> >> >>
> >> >> Dear Ben,
> >> >>
> >> >> The size of the molecules is as irrelevant as the quibbling.
> >> >>
> >> >> The larger CO2 molecule escapes through butyl rubber at about ten
> >> >> times the rate of the obviously smaller O2 molecule:
> >> >
> >> >What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
> >> >pressures < 8 bar for
> >> >
> >> >1) H2
> >> >2) He
> >> >3) CO2
> >>
> >> Why not look up the answers and tell us something?
> >
> >It is your proposition. I am not here to do
> >your work for you.
> >
> >> The links have been posted several times.
> >
> >The discussion had been about H2 and He.
> >You brought the transport rate of CO2.
> >I propose that you provide the data.
> >You and jim beam want others to do
> >your and jim beam's research.
> >You have a proposition? Prove it.
> >
> >What are the transfer rates through butyl rubber at various
> >pressures < 8 bar for
> >1) H2
> >2) He
> >3) CO2
>
> Er, no, you haven't kept up with the discussion from the beginning, so
> you hijacked it off-topic.
>
> Look it up yourself--it would be a refreshing change for you to supply
> something.
You brought in the mobility of CO2 in a sub-thread
on the size of H2 and He. So you have diverted a
discussion as much as I. As for my initial post
it was to correct Jobst Brandt using atomic number
in a context of diffusion coefficients, where
molecular mass is the parameter of interest.
As you say, there is more than size involved.
You intervened in a discussion of H2 and He
to bring in CO2. Now contrast CO2 with H2 and He.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:16:44
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
>>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
>>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
>>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
>>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
>>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He 4.003
>>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
>>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
>>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
>>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3
>>>>>>>>> Ra 226
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
>>>>>>>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
>>>>>>>>> that of H2.
>>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
>>>>>>>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>>>>> So, how big are they?
>>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library of
>>>> chem text books not working for you? or do you have some other agenda?
>>>> if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's on your mind.
>>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
>>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
>>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
>>>
>> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of scientific
>> texts. if you think you can contradict published science data, go right
>> ahead!
>
> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
> What is the size of an He atom?
> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
>
> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
> to go click the link an search for the data
> when you could write the numbers here for
> everybody to read. Publish the numbers and
> cite your references as others do.
>
fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 11:28:39
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
-snip rubber permeability-
> Michael Press wrote:
>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
>> What is the size of an He atom?
>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
>> to go click the link an search for the data
>> when you could write the numbers here for everybody to read. Publish
>> the numbers and
>> cite your references as others do.
jim beam wrote:
> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
OK, I see that an H2 molecule is about 1.48 picometers, a number with
which I have absolutely no familiarity nor point of reference [1]. I
found no 'size' parameter for an He atom which I assume is roughly
'pretty-f**cking-small'. Maybe not as big as an H2 but who knows how a
single He (atomic number 2) relates to a double H (atomic number 1)?
[1]shoes=42, s.o.=B cup, fixie=56". Picometers wtf? I'm lost.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 12:15:02
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On 2007-11-01, A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> -snip rubber permeability-
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
>>> What is the size of an He atom?
>>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
>>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
>>> to go click the link an search for the data
>>> when you could write the numbers here for everybody to read. Publish
>>> the numbers and
>>> cite your references as others do.
>
> jim beam wrote:
>> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
>
> OK, I see that an H2 molecule is about 1.48 picometers, a number with
> which I have absolutely no familiarity nor point of reference [1].
Are you sure? Which fucking link was that?
Wikipedia says 148 picometres (or 1.48 Angstroms).
> I found no 'size' parameter for an He atom which I assume is roughly
> 'pretty-f**cking-small'. Maybe not as big as an H2 but who knows how a
> single He (atomic number 2) relates to a double H (atomic number 1)?
> [1]shoes=42, s.o.=B cup, fixie=56". Picometers wtf? I'm lost.
A picometre is 4e-11 inches. So that's 1/100000000000th of an inch.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 12:17:42
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On 2007-11-01, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
[...]
> A picometre is 4e-11 inches. So that's 1/100000000000th of an inch.
Sorry-- 4/100000000000th of an inch (approximately).
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 12:43:36
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-11-01, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
> [...]
>> A picometre is 4e-11 inches. So that's 1/100000000000th of an inch.
> Sorry-- 4/100000000000th of an inch (approximately).
I found Leo's comments quite helpful. We humans are good with half an
inch or a quarter of one, even a tenth. But -11 exponent is not easy to
visualize if one doesn't work in that scale commonly.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 20:48:13
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Andrew Muzi mused:
> Ben C wrote:
>> On 2007-11-01, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>> [...]
>>> A picometre is 4e-11 inches. So that's 1/100000000000th of an inch.
>> Sorry-- 4/100000000000th of an inch (approximately).
>
> I found Leo's comments quite helpful. We humans are good with half an
> inch or a quarter of one, even a tenth. But -11 exponent is not easy to
> visualize if one doesn't work in that scale commonly.
I suspect that Andrew would be very good at visually estimating the
sizes of threaded fasteners.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:43:20
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<a4mdnS6BjJmh_LTanZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article
> >>> <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>> In article
> >>>>> <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article
> >>>>>>> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> >>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
> >>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
> >>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
> >>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> >>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> >>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
> >>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
> >>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
> >>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
> >>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> >>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> He 4.003
> >>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
> >>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
> >>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
> >>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3
> >>>>>>>>> Ra 226
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> >>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
> >>>>>>>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
> >>>>>>>>> that of H2.
> >>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
> >>>>>>>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
> >>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
> >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
> >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
> >>>>> So, how big are they?
> >>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library of
> >>>> chem text books not working for you? or do you have some other agenda?
> >>>> if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's on your mind.
> >>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
> >>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
> >>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
> >>>
> >> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of scientific
> >> texts. if you think you can contradict published science data, go right
> >> ahead!
> >
> > What is the size of an H2 molecule?
> > What is the size of an He atom?
> > It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
> >
> > I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
> > to go click the link an search for the data
> > when you could write the numbers here for
> > everybody to read. Publish the numbers and
> > cite your references as others do.
> >
>
> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
You say that the H2 is "much larger" than the He atom.
How much larger? I want to know what _you_ say, not
what is in some www site.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:50:56
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <a4mdnS6BjJmh_LTanZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>> <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>> <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>>>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
>>>>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
>>>>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>>>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>>>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> He 4.003
>>>>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
>>>>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
>>>>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
>>>>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3
>>>>>>>>>>> Ra 226
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>>>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2.
>>>>>>>>>>> This gives He a diffusion rate 0.7 times
>>>>>>>>>>> that of H2.
>>>>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of
>>>>>>>>>> He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>>>>>>> So, how big are they?
>>>>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library of
>>>>>> chem text books not working for you? or do you have some other agenda?
>>>>>> if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's on your mind.
>>>>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
>>>>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
>>>>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
>>>>>
>>>> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of scientific
>>>> texts. if you think you can contradict published science data, go right
>>>> ahead!
>>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
>>> What is the size of an He atom?
>>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
>>>
>>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
>>> to go click the link an search for the data
>>> when you could write the numbers here for
>>> everybody to read. Publish the numbers and
>>> cite your references as others do.
>>>
>> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
>
> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
> You say that the H2 is "much larger" than the He atom.
> How much larger? I want to know what _you_ say, not
> what is in some www site.
>
er, why would my answers are any different from published data?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 08:30:37
From: _
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:50:56 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>
> er, why would my answers are any different from published data?
Yup.
Why would they...
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 22:51:57
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
jim beam wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
>> In article <a4mdnS6BjJmh_LTanZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>> In article <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>> In article <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auto tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less leakdown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are less
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> water vapor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inflation to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubulars, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latex
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practical for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teams
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than
>>>>>>>>>>>>> helium, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>>>>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>>>>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>>>> He 4.003
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
>>>>>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3 Ra 226
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2. This gives He a diffusion rate
>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.7 times
>>>>>>>>>>>> that of H2.
>>>>>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the
>>>>>>>>>>> atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>>>>>>>> So, how big are they?
>>>>>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library
>>>>>>> of chem text books not working for you? or do you have some
>>>>>>> other agenda? if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's
>>>>>>> on your mind.
>>>>>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
>>>>>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
>>>>>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
>>>>>>
>>>>> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of
>>>>> scientific texts. if you think you can contradict published
>>>>> science data, go right ahead!
>>>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
>>>> What is the size of an He atom?
>>>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
>>>>
>>>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
>>>> to go click the link an search for the data
>>>> when you could write the numbers here for everybody to read. Publish
>>>> the numbers and
>>>> cite your references as others do.
>>>>
>>> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
>>
>> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
>> You say that the H2 is "much larger" than the He atom.
>> How much larger? I want to know what _you_ say, not
>> what is in some www site.
>>
>
> er, why would my answers are
"be"
> any different from published data?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Oct 2007 23:24:39
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<dKydnV-np5fj9LTanZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
> > Michael Press wrote:
> >> In article <a4mdnS6BjJmh_LTanZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>> In article <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>> In article <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In article <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> In article <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auto tire
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less leakdown
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are less
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> water vapor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inflation to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubulars, but the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> latex
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> practical for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> teams
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> helium, a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> He 4.003
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3 Ra 226
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2. This gives He a diffusion rate
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 0.7 times
> >>>>>>>>>>>> that of H2.
> >>>>>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the
> >>>>>>>>>>> atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate.
> >>>>>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
> >>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
> >>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
> >>>>>>>> So, how big are they?
> >>>>>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library
> >>>>>>> of chem text books not working for you? or do you have some
> >>>>>>> other agenda? if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's
> >>>>>>> on your mind.
> >>>>>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
> >>>>>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
> >>>>>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of
> >>>>> scientific texts. if you think you can contradict published
> >>>>> science data, go right ahead!
> >>>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
> >>>> What is the size of an He atom?
> >>>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
> >>>> to go click the link an search for the data
> >>>> when you could write the numbers here for everybody to read. Publish
> >>>> the numbers and
> >>>> cite your references as others do.
> >>>>
> >>> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
> >>
> >> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
> >> You say that the H2 is "much larger" than the He atom.
> >> How much larger? I want to know what _you_ say, not
> >> what is in some www site.
> >>
> >
> > er, why would my answers are
>
> "be"
>
> > any different from published data?
Copy the data into a message for everyone to see.
No need for everyone to go to the site.
I want to know what you say, not some site on the web.
You made a claim. I ask that you support it.
I know how to do a web search, and could find several
sites, not only one.
What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
How do these numbers support your claim?
"yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
than the atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate."
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 06:03:35
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <dKydnV-np5fj9LTanZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> jim beam wrote:
>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>> In article <a4mdnS6BjJmh_LTanZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>> In article <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auto tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less leakdown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are less
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> water vapor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inflation to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubulars, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latex
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practical for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teams
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> helium, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He 4.003
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3 Ra 226
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2. This gives He a diffusion rate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.7 times
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that of H2.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>>>>>>>>>> So, how big are they?
>>>>>>>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library
>>>>>>>>> of chem text books not working for you? or do you have some
>>>>>>>>> other agenda? if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's
>>>>>>>>> on your mind.
>>>>>>>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
>>>>>>>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
>>>>>>>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of
>>>>>>> scientific texts. if you think you can contradict published
>>>>>>> science data, go right ahead!
>>>>>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
>>>>>> What is the size of an He atom?
>>>>>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
>>>>>> to go click the link an search for the data
>>>>>> when you could write the numbers here for everybody to read. Publish
>>>>>> the numbers and
>>>>>> cite your references as others do.
>>>>>>
>>>>> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
>>>> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
>>>> You say that the H2 is "much larger" than the He atom.
>>>> How much larger? I want to know what _you_ say, not
>>>> what is in some www site.
>>>>
>>> er, why would my answers are
>> "be"
>>
>>> any different from published data?
>
> Copy the data into a message for everyone to see.
> No need for everyone to go to the site.
>
> I want to know what you say, not some site on the web.
> You made a claim. I ask that you support it.
>
> I know how to do a web search, and could find several
> sites, not only one.
>
> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
> How do these numbers support your claim?
>
> "yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
> than the atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate."
>
"is this the right room for an argument?"
"i've told you once!"
"no you haven't!"
"yes i have!"
[etc]
monty python.
you have citations, yet you want to provoke some bizarre fight over
their content being arguable? dude, that itch you're trying to scratch,
ain't my problem!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 20:42:40
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> ...
> "is this the right room for an argument?"
> "i've told you once!"
> "no you haven't!"
> "yes i have!"
> [etc]
Oh! I'm sorry, this is abuse.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 18:34:05
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
In article
<SaKdncGxg5c6U7TanZ2dnUVZ_vjinZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <dKydnV-np5fj9LTanZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> jim beam wrote:
> >>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>> In article <a4mdnS6BjJmh_LTanZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>> In article <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In article <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> In article <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> In article <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auto tire
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less leakdown
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are less
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> water vapor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inflation to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubulars, but the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latex
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practical for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teams
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> helium, a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> He 4.003
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3 Ra 226
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2. This gives He a diffusion rate
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.7 times
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that of H2.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
> >>>>>>>>>> So, how big are they?
> >>>>>>>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library
> >>>>>>>>> of chem text books not working for you? or do you have some
> >>>>>>>>> other agenda? if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's
> >>>>>>>>> on your mind.
> >>>>>>>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
> >>>>>>>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
> >>>>>>>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of
> >>>>>>> scientific texts. if you think you can contradict published
> >>>>>>> science data, go right ahead!
> >>>>>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
> >>>>>> What is the size of an He atom?
> >>>>>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
> >>>>>> to go click the link an search for the data
> >>>>>> when you could write the numbers here for everybody to read. Publish
> >>>>>> the numbers and
> >>>>>> cite your references as others do.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
> >>>> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
> >>>> You say that the H2 is "much larger" than the He atom.
> >>>> How much larger? I want to know what _you_ say, not
> >>>> what is in some www site.
> >>>>
> >>> er, why would my answers are
> >> "be"
> >>
> >>> any different from published data?
> >
> > Copy the data into a message for everyone to see.
> > No need for everyone to go to the site.
> >
> > I want to know what you say, not some site on the web.
> > You made a claim. I ask that you support it.
> >
> > I know how to do a web search, and could find several
> > sites, not only one.
> >
> > What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
> > How do these numbers support your claim?
> >
> > "yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
> > than the atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate."
> >
>
>
> "is this the right room for an argument?"
> "i've told you once!"
> "no you haven't!"
> "yes i have!"
> [etc]
>
> monty python.
"An argument is a connected series of statements
intended to establish a proposition."
You asserted a proposition. That the H2 molecule
is much larger than the He atom. Since then you
do not establish your proposition. A demand that
we do your research is not an argument. Therefore this
is not an argument.
> you have citations, yet you want to provoke some bizarre fight over
> their content being arguable? dude, that itch you're trying to scratch,
> ain't my problem!
Bravely bold Sir Robin rode forth from Camelot
He was not afraid to die, O brave Sir Robin
He was not at all afraid to be killed in nasty ways
Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Robin
He was not in the least bit scared to be mashed into a pulp
Or to have his eyes gouged out and his elbows broken
To have his kneecaps split and his body burned away
And his limbs all hacked and mangled, brave Sir Robin
His head smashed in and his heart cut out
And his liver removed and his bowels unplugged
And his nostrils raped and his bottom burnt off
And his penis...
Well that's enough music for now, lads...
Brave Sir Robin ran away - No!
Bravely ran away, away - I didn't!
When danger reared its ugly head
He bravely turned his tail and fled - No!
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly he chickened out
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 21:51:56
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
<snip crap >
poor wittle mikey wikey - he's upset that his wittle games are so
transparent that the other children won't play...
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 20:44:54
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <SaKdncGxg5c6U7TanZ2dnUVZ_vjinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <dKydnV-np5fj9LTanZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> jim beam wrote:
>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>> In article <a4mdnS6BjJmh_LTanZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <x-CdnY6zAKQ31LTanZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article <msydneBIgJjl5bXanZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <EoKdncjNYqwRm7XanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <Ptmdnb7hmZyJZrranZ2dnUVZ_s7inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <47265218$0$14128$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auto tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less leakdown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are less
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> water vapor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and oxygen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inflation to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubulars, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latex
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practical for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> teams
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think they're using helium.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> helium, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> montomic molecule.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is called for is the molecular mass not atomic mass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MM is what governs the diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He 4.003
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ne 20.18
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ar 39.95
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kr 83.80
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Xe 131.3 Ra 226
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Do not worry about the decimal places.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Molecular mass of H2 is 2. This gives He a diffusion rate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.7 times
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that of H2.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger than the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How big is the H2 molecule,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule#Molecular_size
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and how big is the He atom?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, how big are they?
>>>>>>>>>>> what's the problem michael? wikipedia/google/the world's library
>>>>>>>>>>> of chem text books not working for you? or do you have some
>>>>>>>>>>> other agenda? if the latter, quit fucking about and say what's
>>>>>>>>>>> on your mind.
>>>>>>>>>> You claim that the H2 molecule is much larger than
>>>>>>>>>> the He atom. I asked how big they are. How big are they?
>>>>>>>>>> It seems that it is you, not I, who is temporizing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> eh? i'm "claiming" what you yourself can read in a host of
>>>>>>>>> scientific texts. if you think you can contradict published
>>>>>>>>> science data, go right ahead!
>>>>>>>> What is the size of an H2 molecule?
>>>>>>>> What is the size of an He atom?
>>>>>>>> It is your claim. Give us some numbers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not the only one here. Do you want _everybody_
>>>>>>>> to go click the link an search for the data
>>>>>>>> when you could write the numbers here for everybody to read. Publish
>>>>>>>> the numbers and
>>>>>>>> cite your references as others do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fuck you - you just want to argue. read the fucking links.
>>>>>> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
>>>>>> You say that the H2 is "much larger" than the He atom.
>>>>>> How much larger? I want to know what _you_ say, not
>>>>>> what is in some www site.
>>>>>>
>>>>> er, why would my answers are
>>>> "be"
>>>>
>>>>> any different from published data?
>>> Copy the data into a message for everyone to see.
>>> No need for everyone to go to the site.
>>>
>>> I want to know what you say, not some site on the web.
>>> You made a claim. I ask that you support it.
>>>
>>> I know how to do a web search, and could find several
>>> sites, not only one.
>>>
>>> What is the size of a H2 molecule and a He atom?
>>> How do these numbers support your claim?
>>>
>>> "yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
>>> than the atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion rate."
>>>
>>
>> "is this the right room for an argument?"
>> "i've told you once!"
>> "no you haven't!"
>> "yes i have!"
>> [etc]
>>
>> monty python.
>
> "An argument is a connected series of statements
> intended to establish a proposition."
>
> You asserted a proposition. That the H2 molecule
> is much larger than the He atom. Since then you
> do not establish your proposition. A demand that
> we do your research is not an argument. Therefore this
> is not an argument.
>
>
>> you have citations, yet you want to provoke some bizarre fight over
>> their content being arguable? dude, that itch you're trying to scratch,
>> ain't my problem!
>
> Bravely bold Sir Robin rode forth from Camelot
> He was not afraid to die, O brave Sir Robin
> He was not at all afraid to be killed in nasty ways
> Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Robin
>
> He was not in the least bit scared to be mashed into a pulp
> Or to have his eyes gouged out and his elbows broken
> To have his kneecaps split and his body burned away
> And his limbs all hacked and mangled, brave Sir Robin
>
> His head smashed in and his heart cut out
> And his liver removed and his bowels unplugged
> And his nostrils raped and his bottom burnt off
> And his penis...
> Well that's enough music for now, lads...
>
> Brave Sir Robin ran away - No!
> Bravely ran away, away - I didn't!
> When danger reared its ugly head
> He bravely turned his tail and fled - No!
> Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
> And gallantly he chickened out
> Bravely taking to his feet
> He beat a very brave retreat
> Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin
>
In the frozen land of Nador, they were forced to eat Robin's minstrels.
And there was much rejoicing.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Nov 2007 19:35:03
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> In the frozen land of Nador, they were forced to eat Robin's
> minstrels.
> And there was much rejoicing.
But alas, no trimming.
:-P
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 20:02:23
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Someone writes:
>
>>>> Has anybody tried filling bicycle tires with nitrogen? Auto tire
>>>> dealers are offering a nitrogen fill option claiming less leakdown
>>>> due to the larger molecules.Also less pressure variation are less
>>>> corrosion on tubeless tire wheels due to absence of water vapor
>>>> and oxygen.
>
>>> I am surprised that no one has offered helium tire inflation to the
>>> weight-weenie crowd.
>
>> Some pro/national track teams use helium in their tubulars, but the
>> very small molecule (actually just an atom) combined with latex
>> tubes means pressure loss is too fast to make this practical for
>> road bikes used for several hours at a time.
>
>> It has been alleged that the GB track team use much cheaper
>> nitrogen, but paint their nitrogen cylinders to make other teams
>> think they're using helium.
>
> Hydrogen, although a diatomic element is leakier than helium, a
> montomic molecule.
strange, du pont seem to think helium permeability of butyl rubber is
greater than hydrogen.
http://ap.stop.dupont.com/Vamac/en_US/assets/downloads/vamac_gas_permeability.pdf
but what do they know - maybe they think that diatomic molecules are
larger than single atoms???
>
> 2 He, 10 Ne, 18 Ar, 36 Kr, 54 Xe, 86 Rn
and atomic number means /what/ to permeability exactly???
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2524493
jobst, hydrogen is not a noble gas.
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 05:06:53
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com
Subject: Re: Tires Gradually Go Flat in Storage
|
On Oct 28, 6:06 am, snowsm...@gmail.com wrote:
> I noticed that front and rear tires gradually go flat when leaving my
> bicycle in storage without riding it for a long period of time. Is
> this normal?
>
> Youssef Eldakar
yessir...
|
|
