Archive for the ‘science & technology’ Category

Acetone: Conclusions

Tuesday, January 24th, 2006

As of the most recent refill of my truck’s gas tank, I am con­fi­dent that I have enough data to draw some con­clu­sions about the effect on fuel econ­omy of using ace­tone as a fuel additive.

To recap, for any­one that might have for­got­ten or missed out, a num­ber of months ago, I came across the sug­ges­tion on the inter­net that fuel econ­omy could be improved by using a small quan­tity of ace­tone as a fuel addi­tive. Since I wasn’t ter­ri­bly con­cerned about the risk of break­ing my truck and des­per­ately wanted a way to save some money on gaso­line, I fig­ured I might as well give it a shot. I started out by buy­ing a gal­lon of pure ace­tone and adding a lit­tle bit by fun­nel every time I filled my gas tank (before the gas to encour­age mix­ing). Initially I saw what might have been an improve­ment in fuel effi­ciency but I was rely­ing on my mem­ory and quickly saw my infor­ma­tion as purely anec­do­tal. Understanding how use­less anec­do­tal infor­ma­tion is, I decided to approach the mat­ter in a sci­en­tific and con­trolled man­ner. Now, 22 tanks of gas and nearly four months later I am ready to draw con­clu­sions from my data.

I have found a near lin­ear increase in fuel effi­ciency up to a peak increase of about 10% at a con­cen­tra­tion of ace­tone of 0.2%. Further increases beyond 0.2% result in a very steep fall-off in fuel effi­ciency such that a con­cen­tra­tion of 0.25% is less fuel effi­cient than no ace­tone at all. For those that don’t want to think about con­cen­tra­tions, 0.2% ace­tone is almost exactly equal to 1/3 cup ace­tone for every 10 gal­lons of fuel.

Just to be polic­i­tal, or some­thing like that, for a moment, if I can fina­gle a 10% increase in my fuel econ­omy out of ¢10 worth of ace­tone, I am doing a huge ser­vice to my bank account and the envi­ron­ment (ace­tone doesn’t pol­lute any more than gaso­line). Now let’s just take a moment to think about how much of an impact there would be on the envi­ron­ment if every sin­gle car in America improved its fuel effi­ciency by 10%; acknowl­edg­ing that, why isn’t there a gov­ern­ment man­date on gaso­line requir­ing it to con­tain 0.2% ace­tone (or there­abouts)? My guess would be because your mon­e­tary sav­ings would come straight out of the oil com­pa­nies pock­ets, but that’s beside the point. I think every­one should start adding ace­tone to their fuel tanks, sav­ing them­selves some money, help­ing the envi­ron­ment and cut­ting back on our oil con­sump­tion. Hmm, maybe I’ll write my senator.

I should like to add the caveat that these results are true for my truck and other vehi­cles may have slightly dif­fer­ent ace­tone con­cen­tra­tion sen­si­tiv­i­ties. If you decide to fol­low my lead and add ace­tone to your vehi­cles fuel tank, you should per­form some exper­i­ments on your own to deter­mine your vehi­cles effi­ciency peak con­cen­tra­tion. You should use pure ace­tone (sol­vent from a hard­ware store), not the scented stuff you can buy at CVS. Also, if you do some­thing stu­pid and blow up your car or some­thing, it’ll be your fault alone.

Acetone and the truck status update

Monday, January 9th, 2006

It’s been a while since I’ve men­tioned my exper­i­ments adding ace­tone to my trucks fuel tank, so just to pre­vent you think­ing I’d given up on the mat­ter, here’s an update. I’ve improved the algo­rithms I’m using in my Excel spread­sheet because I was bored, so now I com­pen­sate for remain­ing ace­tone as a result of refill­ing before the tank it empty, vol­ume of ace­tone added and I get rather more infor­ma­tive analy­ses. Additionally, I’ve added a more data points, putting me at 17 tanks of fuel on the chart. Currently, data sug­gests a near lin­ear econ­omy increase for my truck of about 7% at 0.15% ace­tone con­cen­tra­tion (1MPG at 1/3 cup ace­tone). This lin­ear increase isn’t show­ing any signs of lev­el­ing off, so I’m going to start push­ing the con­cen­tra­tion up in the next few tanks. I’ll give you a bet­ter write up with more man­age­able units when I’m sat­is­fied that I’ve found the ace­tone con­cen­tra­tion of max­i­mal econ­omy for my truck. I expect that I’ll prob­a­bly repeat this exper­i­ment with my next vehi­cle, and every vehi­cle there­after for that mat­ter (as long as they still run on petrol).

Color photos before color film

Thursday, December 8th, 2005

Way back in nineteen-aught-nine (1909) – ah those were the good old days – a Russian man by the name of Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorskii devel­oped a tech­nique for tak­ing color pho­tographs with black and white film. The tech­nique, which you can read more about at Damn Interesting involved tak­ing three dif­fer­ent pho­tos using three dif­fer­ent color fil­ters; it’s a pretty clever tech­nique and was pretty rev­o­lu­tion­ary for the time. Tzar Nicky (Nicholas II) liked the color pho­tos and when Sergei pro­posed doc­u­ment­ing the Russian Empire in color pho­tos, Nicky hopped right on board with finan­cial sup­port. In 1948, the US LOC bought all of Sergei’s neg­a­tives from his heirs and in 1998 they used fancy dig­i­tal imag­ing tech­niques to recom­pose the color images in fan­tas­ti­cally high qual­ity. The LOC has put a num­ber of these restored images in an online gallery and more can be found at the Russian Record. Ah, good ol’ Mother Russia, she sure did some keen stuff back in the day (he he, Sputnik).

Mokume Gane

Thursday, November 24th, 2005

I fol­lowed a link on digg to an arti­cle about Mokume Gane and I’ve got to say, the feu­dal Japanese have done it again. Mokume Gane is a method by which intri­cate designs can be made in the face of a metal mix­ture and the site has some really impres­sive exam­ples. I guess this adds another tech­ni­cal level to my view of what the awe­somest wed­ding ring would be.

How to prevent your robots from taking over Cybertron

Monday, October 24th, 2005

Do not build robots that can design new robots.

The Acetone Truck: No Problems So Far

Friday, September 30th, 2005

I’ve been dump­ing ace­tone into my truck’s gas tank for a while now and I’m happy to report that it appears to be harm­less to the truck: no unex­pected explo­sions, no stalling, no loss of power, noth­ing neg­a­tive. I can defin­i­tively say that the ace­tone has not decreased my fuel effi­ciency, but I can not yet say if it has increased my effi­ciency at all. I’m going to run a few more tanks with ace­tone after I get back to Concord and my dri­ving habits sta­bi­lize (drive to Cambridge, drive back, repeat a bunch). After I get a solid base­line of Concord to Cambridge runs with ace­tone, I’ll do a few tanks with­out ace­tone and see if I can notice a change. In the name of sci­ence I will make a point of get­ting gas at the same gas sta­tion as much as absolutely possible.

I started my test­ing with 1/4 cup ace­tone per 15 gal­lon tank (~1.3oz/10gal), using ace­tone from a 1 gal­lon con­tainer of pure ace­tone that I bought at Wal-Mart for the pur­poses of this exper­i­ment. Using the same ace­tone, I stepped up to 1/3 cup ace­tone per 15 gal­lon tank (~1.8oz/10gal) and con­tin­ued to have no prob­lems. I’m plan­ning to step up to 1/2 cup per 15 gal­lon tank (~2.7oz/10gal) before I start doing my real data gath­er­ing. I may go up to 2/3 cup per 15 gal­lon tank (~3.6oz/10gal) after I get some solid evi­dence to sup­port the effec­tive­ness of ace­tone as a fuel additive.

Truck + Acetone Science Problems

Monday, September 12th, 2005

On Friday, I came to dis­cover that one of my truck’s spark­plugs was dis­con­nected and, likely, had been for the three months that I’ve owned the thing. I recon­nected the spark­plug and it’s been run­ning smoother and with­out the back­fir­ing that I’d grown accus­tomed to. Needless to say, adding another cylin­der is going to change the fuel con­sump­tion char­ac­ter­is­tics of my truck so now I’ve got two inde­pen­dant vari­ables con­tribut­ing to my mileage, which will change the way my sci­ence works. I will fig­ure out a way to account for this and get back to you even­tu­ally when I fig­ure out what, if any­thing, the ace­tone does.

What sur­prises me most is that I’d been dri­ving the truck for about 3 months and the dis­con­nected spark­plug had gone com­pletely unno­ticed by me.

Acetoning up the Truck

Thursday, September 8th, 2005

Earlier today, I read on the inter­net that you can use ace­tone as a fuel addi­tive and get bet­ter gas mileage from your car. Now, since every­thing on the inter­net is true or, at least, I don’t really care if I acci­den­tally break my truck in the name of sci­ence, I dumped about 3oz. of ace­tone into my mostly full tank of gas. I’ll let you know how things turn out after a tank or three for sta­tis­tics. According to http://smartgas.net, who seem to have looked into it a bunch, adding 1-3oz. Of ace­tone to 10 gal­lons of gas will give you up to 30% bet­ter mileage. I’ll keep you posted.

How to destroy the Earth

Thursday, May 12th, 2005

I thought it was about time to point peo­ple at a prac­ti­cal guide on How to destroy the Earth.

Inorganic Polymers

Wednesday, March 30th, 2005

I’ve been look­ing into inor­ganic poly­mers a lit­tle and intend to write about them for my Polymer Physics final paper. They turn out to be rather inter­est­ing and have all sort of inter­est­ing back­bones like sil­i­con, ger­ma­nium, tin (a metal), phosphorous-nitrogen, and others.

The Si and Sn back­boned poly­mers are the most inter­est­ing to me, hav­ing inter­est­ing con­duc­tive and phys­i­cal prop­er­ties. As an exam­ple, poly­di­methyl­si­lane (sil­i­con back­one with two methyl groups off each sil­i­con) is a crys­talline poly­mer that is insol­u­ble in every­thing and does not melt (but does decom­pose at 250°C). All in all, very curi­ous mate­ri­als that I will be look­ing into.

Osmium: Densest of the Transition Metals

Tuesday, March 15th, 2005

For those of you that don’t already know, Osmium is my favorite ele­ment. I found some peo­ple on eBay sell­ing Osmium but­tons for $31/g and it made me wish that I had a bunch of money to spend. If you were to ask me how much I want to have a 30g ball of Osmium, the answer would be “so very much”. Sadly, a 30g ball would cost just shy of $1000 and I don’t have that kind of money to spend on pre­cious met­als right now. If I had the money to spare, you could be sure that I’d have a 5cm diam­e­ter but­ton of Osmium in my poses­sion within the week. This of course means that I need to wait until I have more money and then start buy­ing Osmium buttons.

Apparently Oliver Sacks (the writer and neu­rol­o­gist) col­lected Iridium (sec­ond dens­est ele­ment, behind Osmium) but­tons and even­tu­ally got them cast into an ingot. Hmm, per­haps I should col­lect Osmium but­tons with the inten­tion of cast­ing an ingot someday.

Death by Peanut Butter

Tuesday, January 18th, 2005

I remem­bered hear­ing, long ago, that peanut but­ter doesn’t tend to go bad but that when it does, it becomes very car­cino­genic. Not know­ing the details of this lit­tle fact, I turned to the inter­net and found a bunch of sources to explain what was going on.

The molds Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus par­a­siti­cus grow on a num­ber of things and grow espe­cially well on peanuts. These molds release a chem­i­cal known as afla­toxin, which is a strong car­cino­gen and has been linked to liver cancer.

The FDA mon­i­tors afla­toxin lev­els in com­mer­cial prod­ucts and it turns out to be the case that the big brand peanut but­ters (Skippy, Jif, etc.) have the low­est lev­els of afla­toxin. Also, if you go to a health food store and get freshly ground peanut but­ter, you’re dump­ing tons of afla­toxin into yourself.

So buy big brand peanut but­ter and don’t let it go bad.

Tootsie Roll Pop: How Many Licks?

Monday, May 24th, 2004

I have recently been con­duct­ing research in the field of Tootsie Roll Pops and have become quite enam­ored with the ques­tion of how many licks it takes to reach the cen­ter. I have taken a sys­tem­atic approach and begun research in an attempt to answer the ques­tion. I am also in the process of writ­ing a sci­en­tific paper on the mat­ter. Feel free to read the paper in its cur­rent form, but I stress that it is a work in progress and that data is cur­rently not suf­fi­cient to be reli­able. If you or any­one else would be will­ing to con­duct tests and pro­vide me with data I would be greatly appre­cia­tive for the extra data points.