Pre-mixing cryogenic fuels and using only one fuel tankWhy did it take so long for methane to be used as a rocket propellant?Final conclusion/description of the cause of the SpaceX Sept. 1, 2016 anomaly? What's a “buckle”?Why doesn't carbon fiber overwrapping in LOX catch fire? (watch this video first)How much fuel would one need to launch a 1kg object from 100,000 feet?In a cryogenic fuel rocket, at what pressure is the fuel injected into the engine?How long is it feasible to store cryogenic fuels?How are fuel tanks filled with cryogenic hydrogen?How did the Space Shuttle keep its cryogenic fuel cold?Pros and Cons of LH2/LOX vs Other FuelsManufacturing H2 and O2 rocket fuel components?Why is one of these two concurrent fuel-dump spirals blue?Safety regulations for storing, handling, and using rocket fuels?What methods are proposed for storing cryogenic fuels (esp. hydrogen) in space for months or years?

What is going on with 'gets(stdin)' on the site coderbyte?

How much character growth crosses the line into breaking the character

Lowest total scrabble score

A social experiment. What is the worst that can happen?

When were female captains banned from Starfleet?

Calculating total slots

Picking the different solutions to the time independent Schrodinger eqaution

Does malloc reserve more space while allocating memory?

Why "had" in "[something] we would have made had we used [something]"?

Why is it that I can sometimes guess the next note?

Is aluminum electrical wire used on aircraft?

Can a College of Swords bard use a Blade Flourish option on an opportunity attack provoked by their own Dissonant Whispers spell?

How do apertures which seem too large to physically fit work?

Does the Linux kernel need a file system to run?

Has any country ever had 2 former presidents in jail simultaneously?

I'm the sea and the sun

Do the primes contain an infinite almost arithmetic progression?

Store Credit Card Information in Password Manager?

Multiplicative persistence

Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?

Yosemite Fire Rings - What to Expect?

Sums of entire surjective functions

Did arcade monitors have same pixel aspect ratio as TV sets?

How to cover method return statement in Apex Class?



Pre-mixing cryogenic fuels and using only one fuel tank


Why did it take so long for methane to be used as a rocket propellant?Final conclusion/description of the cause of the SpaceX Sept. 1, 2016 anomaly? What's a “buckle”?Why doesn't carbon fiber overwrapping in LOX catch fire? (watch this video first)How much fuel would one need to launch a 1kg object from 100,000 feet?In a cryogenic fuel rocket, at what pressure is the fuel injected into the engine?How long is it feasible to store cryogenic fuels?How are fuel tanks filled with cryogenic hydrogen?How did the Space Shuttle keep its cryogenic fuel cold?Pros and Cons of LH2/LOX vs Other FuelsManufacturing H2 and O2 rocket fuel components?Why is one of these two concurrent fuel-dump spirals blue?Safety regulations for storing, handling, and using rocket fuels?What methods are proposed for storing cryogenic fuels (esp. hydrogen) in space for months or years?













16












$begingroup$


A methalox engine is fed from two cryogenic fuel tanks. Why can't the methane and oxygen be mixed as gases, in the desired proportions, and then chilled to a temp that liquefies both? From a single tank a single turbo pump could then feed this into the combustion chamber (part of flow going thru the nozzle cooling channels). Yes, a bit of same mix would be tapped off to power the turbo pump.



Saves the weight of tank bulkheads, separate plumbing, reduces turbo pump complexities. Must be a reason or the rocket scientists would already be doing this, but would like to know what it is.



Edit: Thank you to all who answered. Even the imperfect answers helped, as the comments helped me work through the whys and wherefores. I did know a methalox mixture, if it could exist, would be highly dangerous, but unsure how dangerous compared to a failure/fire of one tank causing the other tank to rupture, mixing the two. Even I can now see why the rocket scientists got it right.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 5




    $begingroup$
    But what if there is no temperature were both oxygen and methane are liquid? You may look for melting and boiling points of both methane and oxygen in wikipedia.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?; you may want to keep an eye on it.
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Isn't the pre-mixing of fuels - solid ones in this case - exactly what was done with the Shuttle solid rocket boosters? Even the components of that solid propellant aren't exactly safe: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    23 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Wow. NASA of all people actually looked into this!
    $endgroup$
    – slebetman
    22 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Why not premix them? One word: kaboom. A stray spark and you could have all the monoprpellant ignite at once.
    $endgroup$
    – gwally
    14 hours ago















16












$begingroup$


A methalox engine is fed from two cryogenic fuel tanks. Why can't the methane and oxygen be mixed as gases, in the desired proportions, and then chilled to a temp that liquefies both? From a single tank a single turbo pump could then feed this into the combustion chamber (part of flow going thru the nozzle cooling channels). Yes, a bit of same mix would be tapped off to power the turbo pump.



Saves the weight of tank bulkheads, separate plumbing, reduces turbo pump complexities. Must be a reason or the rocket scientists would already be doing this, but would like to know what it is.



Edit: Thank you to all who answered. Even the imperfect answers helped, as the comments helped me work through the whys and wherefores. I did know a methalox mixture, if it could exist, would be highly dangerous, but unsure how dangerous compared to a failure/fire of one tank causing the other tank to rupture, mixing the two. Even I can now see why the rocket scientists got it right.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 5




    $begingroup$
    But what if there is no temperature were both oxygen and methane are liquid? You may look for melting and boiling points of both methane and oxygen in wikipedia.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?; you may want to keep an eye on it.
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Isn't the pre-mixing of fuels - solid ones in this case - exactly what was done with the Shuttle solid rocket boosters? Even the components of that solid propellant aren't exactly safe: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    23 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Wow. NASA of all people actually looked into this!
    $endgroup$
    – slebetman
    22 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Why not premix them? One word: kaboom. A stray spark and you could have all the monoprpellant ignite at once.
    $endgroup$
    – gwally
    14 hours ago













16












16








16


2



$begingroup$


A methalox engine is fed from two cryogenic fuel tanks. Why can't the methane and oxygen be mixed as gases, in the desired proportions, and then chilled to a temp that liquefies both? From a single tank a single turbo pump could then feed this into the combustion chamber (part of flow going thru the nozzle cooling channels). Yes, a bit of same mix would be tapped off to power the turbo pump.



Saves the weight of tank bulkheads, separate plumbing, reduces turbo pump complexities. Must be a reason or the rocket scientists would already be doing this, but would like to know what it is.



Edit: Thank you to all who answered. Even the imperfect answers helped, as the comments helped me work through the whys and wherefores. I did know a methalox mixture, if it could exist, would be highly dangerous, but unsure how dangerous compared to a failure/fire of one tank causing the other tank to rupture, mixing the two. Even I can now see why the rocket scientists got it right.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




A methalox engine is fed from two cryogenic fuel tanks. Why can't the methane and oxygen be mixed as gases, in the desired proportions, and then chilled to a temp that liquefies both? From a single tank a single turbo pump could then feed this into the combustion chamber (part of flow going thru the nozzle cooling channels). Yes, a bit of same mix would be tapped off to power the turbo pump.



Saves the weight of tank bulkheads, separate plumbing, reduces turbo pump complexities. Must be a reason or the rocket scientists would already be doing this, but would like to know what it is.



Edit: Thank you to all who answered. Even the imperfect answers helped, as the comments helped me work through the whys and wherefores. I did know a methalox mixture, if it could exist, would be highly dangerous, but unsure how dangerous compared to a failure/fire of one tank causing the other tank to rupture, mixing the two. Even I can now see why the rocket scientists got it right.







fuel






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday







SpaceInMyHead

















asked yesterday









SpaceInMyHeadSpaceInMyHead

16329




16329







  • 5




    $begingroup$
    But what if there is no temperature were both oxygen and methane are liquid? You may look for melting and boiling points of both methane and oxygen in wikipedia.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?; you may want to keep an eye on it.
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Isn't the pre-mixing of fuels - solid ones in this case - exactly what was done with the Shuttle solid rocket boosters? Even the components of that solid propellant aren't exactly safe: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    23 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Wow. NASA of all people actually looked into this!
    $endgroup$
    – slebetman
    22 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Why not premix them? One word: kaboom. A stray spark and you could have all the monoprpellant ignite at once.
    $endgroup$
    – gwally
    14 hours ago












  • 5




    $begingroup$
    But what if there is no temperature were both oxygen and methane are liquid? You may look for melting and boiling points of both methane and oxygen in wikipedia.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?; you may want to keep an eye on it.
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Isn't the pre-mixing of fuels - solid ones in this case - exactly what was done with the Shuttle solid rocket boosters? Even the components of that solid propellant aren't exactly safe: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster
    $endgroup$
    – jamesqf
    23 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Wow. NASA of all people actually looked into this!
    $endgroup$
    – slebetman
    22 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Why not premix them? One word: kaboom. A stray spark and you could have all the monoprpellant ignite at once.
    $endgroup$
    – gwally
    14 hours ago







5




5




$begingroup$
But what if there is no temperature were both oxygen and methane are liquid? You may look for melting and boiling points of both methane and oxygen in wikipedia.
$endgroup$
– Uwe
yesterday




$begingroup$
But what if there is no temperature were both oxygen and methane are liquid? You may look for melting and boiling points of both methane and oxygen in wikipedia.
$endgroup$
– Uwe
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?; you may want to keep an eye on it.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
yesterday




$begingroup$
I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?; you may want to keep an eye on it.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
yesterday












$begingroup$
Isn't the pre-mixing of fuels - solid ones in this case - exactly what was done with the Shuttle solid rocket boosters? Even the components of that solid propellant aren't exactly safe: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
23 hours ago




$begingroup$
Isn't the pre-mixing of fuels - solid ones in this case - exactly what was done with the Shuttle solid rocket boosters? Even the components of that solid propellant aren't exactly safe: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
23 hours ago












$begingroup$
Wow. NASA of all people actually looked into this!
$endgroup$
– slebetman
22 hours ago




$begingroup$
Wow. NASA of all people actually looked into this!
$endgroup$
– slebetman
22 hours ago




2




2




$begingroup$
Why not premix them? One word: kaboom. A stray spark and you could have all the monoprpellant ignite at once.
$endgroup$
– gwally
14 hours ago




$begingroup$
Why not premix them? One word: kaboom. A stray spark and you could have all the monoprpellant ignite at once.
$endgroup$
– gwally
14 hours ago










7 Answers
7






active

oldest

votes


















7












$begingroup$

Urged on at a similar question on Chemistry SE, it seems that the idea of mixing liquid oxygen and liquid methane is an old one. And one that, using some of the answers above, seems to be cloaked in at least some hyperbole.



Of relevance is R.L. Every and J.O. Thieme, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 2(5) 787-789 (1965) titled "Liquid oxygen and liquid methane mixtures as rocket monopropellants". In the introduction the authors note that previous work shows that the liquids are miscible in all proportions above 90K. Their tests show a specific impulse of almost 300 sec, and an exhaust velocity near 6000 fps.



In addition, since "shock sensitivities were reported" in the earlier work, they did some, well, vaguely disturbing experiments (hey, it was the 60's). "Tests were conducted to determine whether violent stirring or agitation, as found in an impeller-type pump, would detonate the mixture", although they didn't have any explosions there. They then went on to quantify the impact sensitivity, dropping a weight onto a stainless steel beaker of different liquid mixtures from increasing heights until an explosion occurred. Impact sensitivities of 20-60 ft-lb were discovered (these experiments were performed with open beakers of the cryogenic liquids, with light from the room shining on them - hence the hyperbole bit). They also looked at adiabatic compression as a cause of explosion and found the liquid oxygen/methane mixtures were safer than some other things like nitromethane (which really isn't that comforting).



So, it would appear that the idea of using the liquid mixture as a monopropellant isn't totally off the wall, but please do it somewhere far from me...






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The Every & Thieme (1965) paper seems likely to be the "article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant" mentioned by John D. Clark in the excerpt quoted by cjm. Nice find!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    13 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    +1 for but please do it somewhere far from me... ;-)
    $endgroup$
    – MaxW
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    This is the most useful answer yet. And - safer than nitromethane, which is used at many drag race tracks. Especial thanks for winnowing out some incorrect info in some replies.
    $endgroup$
    – SpaceInMyHead
    3 hours ago


















39












$begingroup$

To quote John D. Clark's great book Ignition! (Chapter 11: The Hopeful Monoprops):




If Tannenbaum's mixtures were bad, that proposed at a monopropellant conference in October 1957 by an optimist from Air Products, Inc., was enough to raise the hair on the head of anybody in the propellant business. He suggested that a mixture of liquid oxygen and liquid methane would be an extra high-energy monopropellant, and had even worked out the phase diagrams of the system.* How he avoided suicide (the first rule in handling liquid oxygen is that you never, never let it come in contact with a potential fuel) is an interesting question, particularly as JPL later demonstrated that you could make the mixture detonate merely by shining a bright light on it. Nevertheless, ten years later I read an article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant! Apparently junior engineers are allergic to the history of their own business.







share|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If you want to obey that first rule, an engine using liquid oxygen may never be started. The combustion chamber is the place were oxygen must be mixed with fuel.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday






  • 7




    $begingroup$
    @Uwe, obviously he meant "until you want a raging fire" but thought it unnecessary to say.
    $endgroup$
    – cjm
    yesterday






  • 9




    $begingroup$
    That's a great quote! "...by shining a light on it..." Yowza.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    yesterday






  • 7




    $begingroup$
    @OrganicMarble, that's not even close to the best quote from that book. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it.
    $endgroup$
    – cjm
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Thanks! I was also going to post an answer quoting that exact passage (again), but you saved me the effort. Have a +1.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday



















27












$begingroup$

In addition to what the other answer said, it would take very little provocation for such a situation to turn into a good way to test the blast resistance of nearby facilities.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 20




    $begingroup$
    Put another way: If there exists a tank of premixed liquid CH4 and LOX, I desire to be as far away as physically possible.
    $endgroup$
    – Tristan
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Good news! It's on its way to the moooon!
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    17 hours ago


















14












$begingroup$

At STP:



  • LOX's boiling point is 90.19 K

  • Methane's freezing point is 90.7 K

This does not a priori prove that a solution of the two can not exist. However it does mean that they can not be handled as liquids at the same temperature, making mixing the two more difficult.



And so I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?



We know that liquid air exists which shows that LOX and LN2 can mix together. But methane is an organic molecules and we know that heavier $textC_n textH_2n+2$ hydrocarbons include oils and waxes don't like to dissolve in non-organic solvents.



The argument against premixing is the danger of ignition due to a spark or tiny localized generation of heat. As @Tristan and @PearsonArtPhoto both mention 1, 2 the SpaceX explosion "fast fire" occurred because of the presence of a combustible material in direct contact with LOX and a localized source of mechanically produced heat. See this answer and note that the situation is discussed at length in Scott Manley's video The Dumbest Mistakes In Space Exploration



Also watch the video below, discussed in more detail in Why doesn't carbon fiber overwrapping in LOX catch fire? (watch this video first)











share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    There are explosives made by mixing liquid oxygen with a fuel see. A mixture of lampblack with liquid oxygen was even stronger than dynamite.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    @Uwe write an answer!! Just block-quote that source and it will be perfect!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @Uwe if you are not going to write that answer let me know, and I'll include a block quote here. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Liquid oxygen and charcoal briquettes was a really popular stupid YouTube trick for a while. So Mythbusters wanted to do a "LOX tanker spills load on asphalt road, boom" item but the small tests where so violent that they couldn't get insurance coverage for the full-scale.
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Jacobsen
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @uhoh Just include the links from me into your excellent answer. Here is another one: NASA oxygen safety manual. See page 9-1 or 143: "liquid oxygen spills on pavements such as asphalt have resulted in impact-sensitive conditions that caused explosions from traffic or dropped items." The string explos is found 161 times in this document of 288 pages.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    17 hours ago



















11












$begingroup$

They would stratify.



Think of oil and water.



Liquid oxygen is much denser than liquid hydrogen, with 1.141 g/cm3 for LOX vs. 0.07099 g/cm3 for LH.



Thus, you need to install equipment to ensure proper mixing of the two liquids. This adds not only complexity to an already complex machinery, it also adds weight.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Furthermore at liquid oxygen temperatures, methane is solid. It might be possible to put them both in the liquid phase by using higher pressures, but still sounds like a very bad situation.
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Walsh
    yesterday






  • 7




    $begingroup$
    -1 for several problems. 1) answer is based on the wrong gas to try to make a false point about different densities. 2) answer uses false analogy because oil and water do not mix due to molecular incompatibility (oil is hydrophobic), it's got nothing to do with density, 3) answer forwards false science that density difference is the reason liquids could not mix.
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday







  • 7




    $begingroup$
    It would stratify into CO2, H2O and debris
    $endgroup$
    – Ingolifs
    yesterday






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Liquids only stratify if they're immiscible. LOX and methane dissolve in each other; at cold enough temperatures they've got a unity molar fraction so you can dissolve as much of one in the other as you'd like.
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Jacobsen
    yesterday






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Oh, right. So the significantly different densities of ethanol and water are why vodka stratifies into two layers. Now I understa... What was that? Vodka doesn't stratify, you say?
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    17 hours ago


















9












$begingroup$

On the chemical/physical question of whether such a mixture can exist: Yes it can.



There's a NASA report that looks into this: "ON THE SOLUBILITIES AND RATES OF SOLUTION OF GASES IN LIQUID METHANE", Hibbard and Evans, 1968 and concludes that such mixtures are possible.



Starting on page 8:




Figure 5(a) presents the curves for oxygen, argon, carbon monoxide,
and nitrogen. Also shown are the two experimental values for nitrogen.
Agreement is excellent at 99.83K and good at 110.9K. The curves for
these gases show that solubility should decrease with increasing
temperature and the nitrogen data confirm this. This figure shows the
mole fraction solubility of oxygen to be 1.0 at 90K. This means that
oxygen, which has a normal boiling temperature of 90.1K would
continuously condense in, and be miscible in all proportions, with
liquid methane at 90K.
This is confirmed by reference 11 where, in a
study of the solubility of methane in liquid oxygen, it was concluded
that these formed a near-ideal solution at -297 F (90K)




(emphasis added)



Figure 5 is reproduced below. Note how the solubility of oxygen rises rapidly as temperature drops.



Reference 11 mentioned in there is "Hydrocarbon-Oxygen Systems Solubility", McKinley and Wang, 1960 (unfortunately paywalled) which also has interesting discussion of the stability (i.e. presence or absence of a tendency to explode) of various mixtures. That covers, in delightfully calm terms, why such mixtures are not commonly used: "A composition as pictured at point A (n.b. mostly one component) is safe whereas the composition at point B (i.e. rocket fuel) can be exploded".



enter image description here






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    6












    $begingroup$

    For the static fire test of AMOS-6 it is believed that the oxygen and RP1 fuel combined together due to a failed bulkhead. Even a smaller bit of fuel in oxidizer can cause enough of an explosion to start things moving, part of the reaction was with the carbon overwrap and oxygen, which had a small spark and started the larger explosion seen. In your proposed condition, only a small spark is required to cause a large explosion, as seen in the below video.








    Mixing fuel and oxidizer is bad, even the slightest spark will cause it all to go up in flames. Plus there is a lot of things that can be done to optimize the flow for different conditions, flowing more oxidizer or fuel for certain conditions.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Yes, but it was only an anomaly. :-)
      $endgroup$
      – SpaceInMyHead
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Now imagine that happening orders of magnitude faster due to premixing. It’s essentially a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor of several thousand.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX.
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX. The bulkhead failed later, due to the violent reaction between the carbon overwrap + LOX.
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Bob Jacobsen, this may be the key! Propose to the Pentagon it can be weaponized, that finding a way to mix and store methalox would produce "a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor several thousand." Mega-funding will ensue. :-) :-)
      $endgroup$
      – SpaceInMyHead
      yesterday










    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "508"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f34973%2fpre-mixing-cryogenic-fuels-and-using-only-one-fuel-tank%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    7 Answers
    7






    active

    oldest

    votes








    7 Answers
    7






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    7












    $begingroup$

    Urged on at a similar question on Chemistry SE, it seems that the idea of mixing liquid oxygen and liquid methane is an old one. And one that, using some of the answers above, seems to be cloaked in at least some hyperbole.



    Of relevance is R.L. Every and J.O. Thieme, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 2(5) 787-789 (1965) titled "Liquid oxygen and liquid methane mixtures as rocket monopropellants". In the introduction the authors note that previous work shows that the liquids are miscible in all proportions above 90K. Their tests show a specific impulse of almost 300 sec, and an exhaust velocity near 6000 fps.



    In addition, since "shock sensitivities were reported" in the earlier work, they did some, well, vaguely disturbing experiments (hey, it was the 60's). "Tests were conducted to determine whether violent stirring or agitation, as found in an impeller-type pump, would detonate the mixture", although they didn't have any explosions there. They then went on to quantify the impact sensitivity, dropping a weight onto a stainless steel beaker of different liquid mixtures from increasing heights until an explosion occurred. Impact sensitivities of 20-60 ft-lb were discovered (these experiments were performed with open beakers of the cryogenic liquids, with light from the room shining on them - hence the hyperbole bit). They also looked at adiabatic compression as a cause of explosion and found the liquid oxygen/methane mixtures were safer than some other things like nitromethane (which really isn't that comforting).



    So, it would appear that the idea of using the liquid mixture as a monopropellant isn't totally off the wall, but please do it somewhere far from me...






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      The Every & Thieme (1965) paper seems likely to be the "article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant" mentioned by John D. Clark in the excerpt quoted by cjm. Nice find!
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      +1 for but please do it somewhere far from me... ;-)
      $endgroup$
      – MaxW
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      This is the most useful answer yet. And - safer than nitromethane, which is used at many drag race tracks. Especial thanks for winnowing out some incorrect info in some replies.
      $endgroup$
      – SpaceInMyHead
      3 hours ago















    7












    $begingroup$

    Urged on at a similar question on Chemistry SE, it seems that the idea of mixing liquid oxygen and liquid methane is an old one. And one that, using some of the answers above, seems to be cloaked in at least some hyperbole.



    Of relevance is R.L. Every and J.O. Thieme, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 2(5) 787-789 (1965) titled "Liquid oxygen and liquid methane mixtures as rocket monopropellants". In the introduction the authors note that previous work shows that the liquids are miscible in all proportions above 90K. Their tests show a specific impulse of almost 300 sec, and an exhaust velocity near 6000 fps.



    In addition, since "shock sensitivities were reported" in the earlier work, they did some, well, vaguely disturbing experiments (hey, it was the 60's). "Tests were conducted to determine whether violent stirring or agitation, as found in an impeller-type pump, would detonate the mixture", although they didn't have any explosions there. They then went on to quantify the impact sensitivity, dropping a weight onto a stainless steel beaker of different liquid mixtures from increasing heights until an explosion occurred. Impact sensitivities of 20-60 ft-lb were discovered (these experiments were performed with open beakers of the cryogenic liquids, with light from the room shining on them - hence the hyperbole bit). They also looked at adiabatic compression as a cause of explosion and found the liquid oxygen/methane mixtures were safer than some other things like nitromethane (which really isn't that comforting).



    So, it would appear that the idea of using the liquid mixture as a monopropellant isn't totally off the wall, but please do it somewhere far from me...






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      The Every & Thieme (1965) paper seems likely to be the "article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant" mentioned by John D. Clark in the excerpt quoted by cjm. Nice find!
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      +1 for but please do it somewhere far from me... ;-)
      $endgroup$
      – MaxW
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      This is the most useful answer yet. And - safer than nitromethane, which is used at many drag race tracks. Especial thanks for winnowing out some incorrect info in some replies.
      $endgroup$
      – SpaceInMyHead
      3 hours ago













    7












    7








    7





    $begingroup$

    Urged on at a similar question on Chemistry SE, it seems that the idea of mixing liquid oxygen and liquid methane is an old one. And one that, using some of the answers above, seems to be cloaked in at least some hyperbole.



    Of relevance is R.L. Every and J.O. Thieme, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 2(5) 787-789 (1965) titled "Liquid oxygen and liquid methane mixtures as rocket monopropellants". In the introduction the authors note that previous work shows that the liquids are miscible in all proportions above 90K. Their tests show a specific impulse of almost 300 sec, and an exhaust velocity near 6000 fps.



    In addition, since "shock sensitivities were reported" in the earlier work, they did some, well, vaguely disturbing experiments (hey, it was the 60's). "Tests were conducted to determine whether violent stirring or agitation, as found in an impeller-type pump, would detonate the mixture", although they didn't have any explosions there. They then went on to quantify the impact sensitivity, dropping a weight onto a stainless steel beaker of different liquid mixtures from increasing heights until an explosion occurred. Impact sensitivities of 20-60 ft-lb were discovered (these experiments were performed with open beakers of the cryogenic liquids, with light from the room shining on them - hence the hyperbole bit). They also looked at adiabatic compression as a cause of explosion and found the liquid oxygen/methane mixtures were safer than some other things like nitromethane (which really isn't that comforting).



    So, it would appear that the idea of using the liquid mixture as a monopropellant isn't totally off the wall, but please do it somewhere far from me...






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$



    Urged on at a similar question on Chemistry SE, it seems that the idea of mixing liquid oxygen and liquid methane is an old one. And one that, using some of the answers above, seems to be cloaked in at least some hyperbole.



    Of relevance is R.L. Every and J.O. Thieme, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 2(5) 787-789 (1965) titled "Liquid oxygen and liquid methane mixtures as rocket monopropellants". In the introduction the authors note that previous work shows that the liquids are miscible in all proportions above 90K. Their tests show a specific impulse of almost 300 sec, and an exhaust velocity near 6000 fps.



    In addition, since "shock sensitivities were reported" in the earlier work, they did some, well, vaguely disturbing experiments (hey, it was the 60's). "Tests were conducted to determine whether violent stirring or agitation, as found in an impeller-type pump, would detonate the mixture", although they didn't have any explosions there. They then went on to quantify the impact sensitivity, dropping a weight onto a stainless steel beaker of different liquid mixtures from increasing heights until an explosion occurred. Impact sensitivities of 20-60 ft-lb were discovered (these experiments were performed with open beakers of the cryogenic liquids, with light from the room shining on them - hence the hyperbole bit). They also looked at adiabatic compression as a cause of explosion and found the liquid oxygen/methane mixtures were safer than some other things like nitromethane (which really isn't that comforting).



    So, it would appear that the idea of using the liquid mixture as a monopropellant isn't totally off the wall, but please do it somewhere far from me...







    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer






    New contributor




    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    answered 15 hours ago









    Jon CusterJon Custer

    1864




    1864




    New contributor




    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





    New contributor





    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    Jon Custer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.











    • $begingroup$
      The Every & Thieme (1965) paper seems likely to be the "article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant" mentioned by John D. Clark in the excerpt quoted by cjm. Nice find!
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      +1 for but please do it somewhere far from me... ;-)
      $endgroup$
      – MaxW
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      This is the most useful answer yet. And - safer than nitromethane, which is used at many drag race tracks. Especial thanks for winnowing out some incorrect info in some replies.
      $endgroup$
      – SpaceInMyHead
      3 hours ago
















    • $begingroup$
      The Every & Thieme (1965) paper seems likely to be the "article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant" mentioned by John D. Clark in the excerpt quoted by cjm. Nice find!
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      +1 for but please do it somewhere far from me... ;-)
      $endgroup$
      – MaxW
      7 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      This is the most useful answer yet. And - safer than nitromethane, which is used at many drag race tracks. Especial thanks for winnowing out some incorrect info in some replies.
      $endgroup$
      – SpaceInMyHead
      3 hours ago















    $begingroup$
    The Every & Thieme (1965) paper seems likely to be the "article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant" mentioned by John D. Clark in the excerpt quoted by cjm. Nice find!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    13 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    The Every & Thieme (1965) paper seems likely to be the "article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant" mentioned by John D. Clark in the excerpt quoted by cjm. Nice find!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    13 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    +1 for but please do it somewhere far from me... ;-)
    $endgroup$
    – MaxW
    7 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    +1 for but please do it somewhere far from me... ;-)
    $endgroup$
    – MaxW
    7 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    This is the most useful answer yet. And - safer than nitromethane, which is used at many drag race tracks. Especial thanks for winnowing out some incorrect info in some replies.
    $endgroup$
    – SpaceInMyHead
    3 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    This is the most useful answer yet. And - safer than nitromethane, which is used at many drag race tracks. Especial thanks for winnowing out some incorrect info in some replies.
    $endgroup$
    – SpaceInMyHead
    3 hours ago











    39












    $begingroup$

    To quote John D. Clark's great book Ignition! (Chapter 11: The Hopeful Monoprops):




    If Tannenbaum's mixtures were bad, that proposed at a monopropellant conference in October 1957 by an optimist from Air Products, Inc., was enough to raise the hair on the head of anybody in the propellant business. He suggested that a mixture of liquid oxygen and liquid methane would be an extra high-energy monopropellant, and had even worked out the phase diagrams of the system.* How he avoided suicide (the first rule in handling liquid oxygen is that you never, never let it come in contact with a potential fuel) is an interesting question, particularly as JPL later demonstrated that you could make the mixture detonate merely by shining a bright light on it. Nevertheless, ten years later I read an article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant! Apparently junior engineers are allergic to the history of their own business.







    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      If you want to obey that first rule, an engine using liquid oxygen may never be started. The combustion chamber is the place were oxygen must be mixed with fuel.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @Uwe, obviously he meant "until you want a raging fire" but thought it unnecessary to say.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      That's a great quote! "...by shining a light on it..." Yowza.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @OrganicMarble, that's not even close to the best quote from that book. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Thanks! I was also going to post an answer quoting that exact passage (again), but you saved me the effort. Have a +1.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      yesterday
















    39












    $begingroup$

    To quote John D. Clark's great book Ignition! (Chapter 11: The Hopeful Monoprops):




    If Tannenbaum's mixtures were bad, that proposed at a monopropellant conference in October 1957 by an optimist from Air Products, Inc., was enough to raise the hair on the head of anybody in the propellant business. He suggested that a mixture of liquid oxygen and liquid methane would be an extra high-energy monopropellant, and had even worked out the phase diagrams of the system.* How he avoided suicide (the first rule in handling liquid oxygen is that you never, never let it come in contact with a potential fuel) is an interesting question, particularly as JPL later demonstrated that you could make the mixture detonate merely by shining a bright light on it. Nevertheless, ten years later I read an article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant! Apparently junior engineers are allergic to the history of their own business.







    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      If you want to obey that first rule, an engine using liquid oxygen may never be started. The combustion chamber is the place were oxygen must be mixed with fuel.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @Uwe, obviously he meant "until you want a raging fire" but thought it unnecessary to say.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      That's a great quote! "...by shining a light on it..." Yowza.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @OrganicMarble, that's not even close to the best quote from that book. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Thanks! I was also going to post an answer quoting that exact passage (again), but you saved me the effort. Have a +1.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      yesterday














    39












    39








    39





    $begingroup$

    To quote John D. Clark's great book Ignition! (Chapter 11: The Hopeful Monoprops):




    If Tannenbaum's mixtures were bad, that proposed at a monopropellant conference in October 1957 by an optimist from Air Products, Inc., was enough to raise the hair on the head of anybody in the propellant business. He suggested that a mixture of liquid oxygen and liquid methane would be an extra high-energy monopropellant, and had even worked out the phase diagrams of the system.* How he avoided suicide (the first rule in handling liquid oxygen is that you never, never let it come in contact with a potential fuel) is an interesting question, particularly as JPL later demonstrated that you could make the mixture detonate merely by shining a bright light on it. Nevertheless, ten years later I read an article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant! Apparently junior engineers are allergic to the history of their own business.







    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    To quote John D. Clark's great book Ignition! (Chapter 11: The Hopeful Monoprops):




    If Tannenbaum's mixtures were bad, that proposed at a monopropellant conference in October 1957 by an optimist from Air Products, Inc., was enough to raise the hair on the head of anybody in the propellant business. He suggested that a mixture of liquid oxygen and liquid methane would be an extra high-energy monopropellant, and had even worked out the phase diagrams of the system.* How he avoided suicide (the first rule in handling liquid oxygen is that you never, never let it come in contact with a potential fuel) is an interesting question, particularly as JPL later demonstrated that you could make the mixture detonate merely by shining a bright light on it. Nevertheless, ten years later I read an article seriously proposing an oxygen-methane monopropellant! Apparently junior engineers are allergic to the history of their own business.








    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    cjmcjm

    546135




    546135







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      If you want to obey that first rule, an engine using liquid oxygen may never be started. The combustion chamber is the place were oxygen must be mixed with fuel.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @Uwe, obviously he meant "until you want a raging fire" but thought it unnecessary to say.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      That's a great quote! "...by shining a light on it..." Yowza.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @OrganicMarble, that's not even close to the best quote from that book. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Thanks! I was also going to post an answer quoting that exact passage (again), but you saved me the effort. Have a +1.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      yesterday













    • 1




      $begingroup$
      If you want to obey that first rule, an engine using liquid oxygen may never be started. The combustion chamber is the place were oxygen must be mixed with fuel.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @Uwe, obviously he meant "until you want a raging fire" but thought it unnecessary to say.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 9




      $begingroup$
      That's a great quote! "...by shining a light on it..." Yowza.
      $endgroup$
      – Organic Marble
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      @OrganicMarble, that's not even close to the best quote from that book. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it.
      $endgroup$
      – cjm
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Thanks! I was also going to post an answer quoting that exact passage (again), but you saved me the effort. Have a +1.
      $endgroup$
      – Ilmari Karonen
      yesterday








    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    If you want to obey that first rule, an engine using liquid oxygen may never be started. The combustion chamber is the place were oxygen must be mixed with fuel.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    If you want to obey that first rule, an engine using liquid oxygen may never be started. The combustion chamber is the place were oxygen must be mixed with fuel.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday




    7




    7




    $begingroup$
    @Uwe, obviously he meant "until you want a raging fire" but thought it unnecessary to say.
    $endgroup$
    – cjm
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    @Uwe, obviously he meant "until you want a raging fire" but thought it unnecessary to say.
    $endgroup$
    – cjm
    yesterday




    9




    9




    $begingroup$
    That's a great quote! "...by shining a light on it..." Yowza.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    That's a great quote! "...by shining a light on it..." Yowza.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    yesterday




    7




    7




    $begingroup$
    @OrganicMarble, that's not even close to the best quote from that book. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it.
    $endgroup$
    – cjm
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    @OrganicMarble, that's not even close to the best quote from that book. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it.
    $endgroup$
    – cjm
    yesterday




    2




    2




    $begingroup$
    Thanks! I was also going to post an answer quoting that exact passage (again), but you saved me the effort. Have a +1.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday





    $begingroup$
    Thanks! I was also going to post an answer quoting that exact passage (again), but you saved me the effort. Have a +1.
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday












    27












    $begingroup$

    In addition to what the other answer said, it would take very little provocation for such a situation to turn into a good way to test the blast resistance of nearby facilities.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 20




      $begingroup$
      Put another way: If there exists a tank of premixed liquid CH4 and LOX, I desire to be as far away as physically possible.
      $endgroup$
      – Tristan
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Good news! It's on its way to the moooon!
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago















    27












    $begingroup$

    In addition to what the other answer said, it would take very little provocation for such a situation to turn into a good way to test the blast resistance of nearby facilities.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 20




      $begingroup$
      Put another way: If there exists a tank of premixed liquid CH4 and LOX, I desire to be as far away as physically possible.
      $endgroup$
      – Tristan
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Good news! It's on its way to the moooon!
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago













    27












    27








    27





    $begingroup$

    In addition to what the other answer said, it would take very little provocation for such a situation to turn into a good way to test the blast resistance of nearby facilities.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    In addition to what the other answer said, it would take very little provocation for such a situation to turn into a good way to test the blast resistance of nearby facilities.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    TristanTristan

    10.9k13856




    10.9k13856







    • 20




      $begingroup$
      Put another way: If there exists a tank of premixed liquid CH4 and LOX, I desire to be as far away as physically possible.
      $endgroup$
      – Tristan
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Good news! It's on its way to the moooon!
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago












    • 20




      $begingroup$
      Put another way: If there exists a tank of premixed liquid CH4 and LOX, I desire to be as far away as physically possible.
      $endgroup$
      – Tristan
      yesterday






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Good news! It's on its way to the moooon!
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago







    20




    20




    $begingroup$
    Put another way: If there exists a tank of premixed liquid CH4 and LOX, I desire to be as far away as physically possible.
    $endgroup$
    – Tristan
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    Put another way: If there exists a tank of premixed liquid CH4 and LOX, I desire to be as far away as physically possible.
    $endgroup$
    – Tristan
    yesterday




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    Good news! It's on its way to the moooon!
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    17 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Good news! It's on its way to the moooon!
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    17 hours ago











    14












    $begingroup$

    At STP:



    • LOX's boiling point is 90.19 K

    • Methane's freezing point is 90.7 K

    This does not a priori prove that a solution of the two can not exist. However it does mean that they can not be handled as liquids at the same temperature, making mixing the two more difficult.



    And so I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?



    We know that liquid air exists which shows that LOX and LN2 can mix together. But methane is an organic molecules and we know that heavier $textC_n textH_2n+2$ hydrocarbons include oils and waxes don't like to dissolve in non-organic solvents.



    The argument against premixing is the danger of ignition due to a spark or tiny localized generation of heat. As @Tristan and @PearsonArtPhoto both mention 1, 2 the SpaceX explosion "fast fire" occurred because of the presence of a combustible material in direct contact with LOX and a localized source of mechanically produced heat. See this answer and note that the situation is discussed at length in Scott Manley's video The Dumbest Mistakes In Space Exploration



    Also watch the video below, discussed in more detail in Why doesn't carbon fiber overwrapping in LOX catch fire? (watch this video first)











    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$








    • 3




      $begingroup$
      There are explosives made by mixing liquid oxygen with a fuel see. A mixture of lampblack with liquid oxygen was even stronger than dynamite.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe write an answer!! Just block-quote that source and it will be perfect!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday











    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe if you are not going to write that answer let me know, and I'll include a block quote here. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquid oxygen and charcoal briquettes was a really popular stupid YouTube trick for a while. So Mythbusters wanted to do a "LOX tanker spills load on asphalt road, boom" item but the small tests where so violent that they couldn't get insurance coverage for the full-scale.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @uhoh Just include the links from me into your excellent answer. Here is another one: NASA oxygen safety manual. See page 9-1 or 143: "liquid oxygen spills on pavements such as asphalt have resulted in impact-sensitive conditions that caused explosions from traffic or dropped items." The string explos is found 161 times in this document of 288 pages.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      17 hours ago
















    14












    $begingroup$

    At STP:



    • LOX's boiling point is 90.19 K

    • Methane's freezing point is 90.7 K

    This does not a priori prove that a solution of the two can not exist. However it does mean that they can not be handled as liquids at the same temperature, making mixing the two more difficult.



    And so I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?



    We know that liquid air exists which shows that LOX and LN2 can mix together. But methane is an organic molecules and we know that heavier $textC_n textH_2n+2$ hydrocarbons include oils and waxes don't like to dissolve in non-organic solvents.



    The argument against premixing is the danger of ignition due to a spark or tiny localized generation of heat. As @Tristan and @PearsonArtPhoto both mention 1, 2 the SpaceX explosion "fast fire" occurred because of the presence of a combustible material in direct contact with LOX and a localized source of mechanically produced heat. See this answer and note that the situation is discussed at length in Scott Manley's video The Dumbest Mistakes In Space Exploration



    Also watch the video below, discussed in more detail in Why doesn't carbon fiber overwrapping in LOX catch fire? (watch this video first)











    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$








    • 3




      $begingroup$
      There are explosives made by mixing liquid oxygen with a fuel see. A mixture of lampblack with liquid oxygen was even stronger than dynamite.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe write an answer!! Just block-quote that source and it will be perfect!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday











    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe if you are not going to write that answer let me know, and I'll include a block quote here. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquid oxygen and charcoal briquettes was a really popular stupid YouTube trick for a while. So Mythbusters wanted to do a "LOX tanker spills load on asphalt road, boom" item but the small tests where so violent that they couldn't get insurance coverage for the full-scale.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @uhoh Just include the links from me into your excellent answer. Here is another one: NASA oxygen safety manual. See page 9-1 or 143: "liquid oxygen spills on pavements such as asphalt have resulted in impact-sensitive conditions that caused explosions from traffic or dropped items." The string explos is found 161 times in this document of 288 pages.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      17 hours ago














    14












    14








    14





    $begingroup$

    At STP:



    • LOX's boiling point is 90.19 K

    • Methane's freezing point is 90.7 K

    This does not a priori prove that a solution of the two can not exist. However it does mean that they can not be handled as liquids at the same temperature, making mixing the two more difficult.



    And so I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?



    We know that liquid air exists which shows that LOX and LN2 can mix together. But methane is an organic molecules and we know that heavier $textC_n textH_2n+2$ hydrocarbons include oils and waxes don't like to dissolve in non-organic solvents.



    The argument against premixing is the danger of ignition due to a spark or tiny localized generation of heat. As @Tristan and @PearsonArtPhoto both mention 1, 2 the SpaceX explosion "fast fire" occurred because of the presence of a combustible material in direct contact with LOX and a localized source of mechanically produced heat. See this answer and note that the situation is discussed at length in Scott Manley's video The Dumbest Mistakes In Space Exploration



    Also watch the video below, discussed in more detail in Why doesn't carbon fiber overwrapping in LOX catch fire? (watch this video first)











    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    At STP:



    • LOX's boiling point is 90.19 K

    • Methane's freezing point is 90.7 K

    This does not a priori prove that a solution of the two can not exist. However it does mean that they can not be handled as liquids at the same temperature, making mixing the two more difficult.



    And so I've just asked Can a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and methane exist as a liquid at standard pressure and some (low) temperature?



    We know that liquid air exists which shows that LOX and LN2 can mix together. But methane is an organic molecules and we know that heavier $textC_n textH_2n+2$ hydrocarbons include oils and waxes don't like to dissolve in non-organic solvents.



    The argument against premixing is the danger of ignition due to a spark or tiny localized generation of heat. As @Tristan and @PearsonArtPhoto both mention 1, 2 the SpaceX explosion "fast fire" occurred because of the presence of a combustible material in direct contact with LOX and a localized source of mechanically produced heat. See this answer and note that the situation is discussed at length in Scott Manley's video The Dumbest Mistakes In Space Exploration



    Also watch the video below, discussed in more detail in Why doesn't carbon fiber overwrapping in LOX catch fire? (watch this video first)




















    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited yesterday

























    answered yesterday









    uhohuhoh

    39.2k18144498




    39.2k18144498







    • 3




      $begingroup$
      There are explosives made by mixing liquid oxygen with a fuel see. A mixture of lampblack with liquid oxygen was even stronger than dynamite.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe write an answer!! Just block-quote that source and it will be perfect!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday











    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe if you are not going to write that answer let me know, and I'll include a block quote here. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquid oxygen and charcoal briquettes was a really popular stupid YouTube trick for a while. So Mythbusters wanted to do a "LOX tanker spills load on asphalt road, boom" item but the small tests where so violent that they couldn't get insurance coverage for the full-scale.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @uhoh Just include the links from me into your excellent answer. Here is another one: NASA oxygen safety manual. See page 9-1 or 143: "liquid oxygen spills on pavements such as asphalt have resulted in impact-sensitive conditions that caused explosions from traffic or dropped items." The string explos is found 161 times in this document of 288 pages.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      17 hours ago













    • 3




      $begingroup$
      There are explosives made by mixing liquid oxygen with a fuel see. A mixture of lampblack with liquid oxygen was even stronger than dynamite.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe write an answer!! Just block-quote that source and it will be perfect!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday











    • $begingroup$
      @Uwe if you are not going to write that answer let me know, and I'll include a block quote here. Thanks!
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquid oxygen and charcoal briquettes was a really popular stupid YouTube trick for a while. So Mythbusters wanted to do a "LOX tanker spills load on asphalt road, boom" item but the small tests where so violent that they couldn't get insurance coverage for the full-scale.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      @uhoh Just include the links from me into your excellent answer. Here is another one: NASA oxygen safety manual. See page 9-1 or 143: "liquid oxygen spills on pavements such as asphalt have resulted in impact-sensitive conditions that caused explosions from traffic or dropped items." The string explos is found 161 times in this document of 288 pages.
      $endgroup$
      – Uwe
      17 hours ago








    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    There are explosives made by mixing liquid oxygen with a fuel see. A mixture of lampblack with liquid oxygen was even stronger than dynamite.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    There are explosives made by mixing liquid oxygen with a fuel see. A mixture of lampblack with liquid oxygen was even stronger than dynamite.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    yesterday












    $begingroup$
    @Uwe write an answer!! Just block-quote that source and it will be perfect!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday





    $begingroup$
    @Uwe write an answer!! Just block-quote that source and it will be perfect!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday













    $begingroup$
    @Uwe if you are not going to write that answer let me know, and I'll include a block quote here. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    @Uwe if you are not going to write that answer let me know, and I'll include a block quote here. Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday




    4




    4




    $begingroup$
    Liquid oxygen and charcoal briquettes was a really popular stupid YouTube trick for a while. So Mythbusters wanted to do a "LOX tanker spills load on asphalt road, boom" item but the small tests where so violent that they couldn't get insurance coverage for the full-scale.
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Jacobsen
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    Liquid oxygen and charcoal briquettes was a really popular stupid YouTube trick for a while. So Mythbusters wanted to do a "LOX tanker spills load on asphalt road, boom" item but the small tests where so violent that they couldn't get insurance coverage for the full-scale.
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Jacobsen
    yesterday




    2




    2




    $begingroup$
    @uhoh Just include the links from me into your excellent answer. Here is another one: NASA oxygen safety manual. See page 9-1 or 143: "liquid oxygen spills on pavements such as asphalt have resulted in impact-sensitive conditions that caused explosions from traffic or dropped items." The string explos is found 161 times in this document of 288 pages.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    17 hours ago





    $begingroup$
    @uhoh Just include the links from me into your excellent answer. Here is another one: NASA oxygen safety manual. See page 9-1 or 143: "liquid oxygen spills on pavements such as asphalt have resulted in impact-sensitive conditions that caused explosions from traffic or dropped items." The string explos is found 161 times in this document of 288 pages.
    $endgroup$
    – Uwe
    17 hours ago












    11












    $begingroup$

    They would stratify.



    Think of oil and water.



    Liquid oxygen is much denser than liquid hydrogen, with 1.141 g/cm3 for LOX vs. 0.07099 g/cm3 for LH.



    Thus, you need to install equipment to ensure proper mixing of the two liquids. This adds not only complexity to an already complex machinery, it also adds weight.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 3




      $begingroup$
      Furthermore at liquid oxygen temperatures, methane is solid. It might be possible to put them both in the liquid phase by using higher pressures, but still sounds like a very bad situation.
      $endgroup$
      – Blake Walsh
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      -1 for several problems. 1) answer is based on the wrong gas to try to make a false point about different densities. 2) answer uses false analogy because oil and water do not mix due to molecular incompatibility (oil is hydrophobic), it's got nothing to do with density, 3) answer forwards false science that density difference is the reason liquids could not mix.
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday







    • 7




      $begingroup$
      It would stratify into CO2, H2O and debris
      $endgroup$
      – Ingolifs
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquids only stratify if they're immiscible. LOX and methane dissolve in each other; at cold enough temperatures they've got a unity molar fraction so you can dissolve as much of one in the other as you'd like.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Oh, right. So the significantly different densities of ethanol and water are why vodka stratifies into two layers. Now I understa... What was that? Vodka doesn't stratify, you say?
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago















    11












    $begingroup$

    They would stratify.



    Think of oil and water.



    Liquid oxygen is much denser than liquid hydrogen, with 1.141 g/cm3 for LOX vs. 0.07099 g/cm3 for LH.



    Thus, you need to install equipment to ensure proper mixing of the two liquids. This adds not only complexity to an already complex machinery, it also adds weight.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 3




      $begingroup$
      Furthermore at liquid oxygen temperatures, methane is solid. It might be possible to put them both in the liquid phase by using higher pressures, but still sounds like a very bad situation.
      $endgroup$
      – Blake Walsh
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      -1 for several problems. 1) answer is based on the wrong gas to try to make a false point about different densities. 2) answer uses false analogy because oil and water do not mix due to molecular incompatibility (oil is hydrophobic), it's got nothing to do with density, 3) answer forwards false science that density difference is the reason liquids could not mix.
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday







    • 7




      $begingroup$
      It would stratify into CO2, H2O and debris
      $endgroup$
      – Ingolifs
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquids only stratify if they're immiscible. LOX and methane dissolve in each other; at cold enough temperatures they've got a unity molar fraction so you can dissolve as much of one in the other as you'd like.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Oh, right. So the significantly different densities of ethanol and water are why vodka stratifies into two layers. Now I understa... What was that? Vodka doesn't stratify, you say?
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago













    11












    11








    11





    $begingroup$

    They would stratify.



    Think of oil and water.



    Liquid oxygen is much denser than liquid hydrogen, with 1.141 g/cm3 for LOX vs. 0.07099 g/cm3 for LH.



    Thus, you need to install equipment to ensure proper mixing of the two liquids. This adds not only complexity to an already complex machinery, it also adds weight.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    They would stratify.



    Think of oil and water.



    Liquid oxygen is much denser than liquid hydrogen, with 1.141 g/cm3 for LOX vs. 0.07099 g/cm3 for LH.



    Thus, you need to install equipment to ensure proper mixing of the two liquids. This adds not only complexity to an already complex machinery, it also adds weight.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    Dohn JoeDohn Joe

    49929




    49929







    • 3




      $begingroup$
      Furthermore at liquid oxygen temperatures, methane is solid. It might be possible to put them both in the liquid phase by using higher pressures, but still sounds like a very bad situation.
      $endgroup$
      – Blake Walsh
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      -1 for several problems. 1) answer is based on the wrong gas to try to make a false point about different densities. 2) answer uses false analogy because oil and water do not mix due to molecular incompatibility (oil is hydrophobic), it's got nothing to do with density, 3) answer forwards false science that density difference is the reason liquids could not mix.
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday







    • 7




      $begingroup$
      It would stratify into CO2, H2O and debris
      $endgroup$
      – Ingolifs
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquids only stratify if they're immiscible. LOX and methane dissolve in each other; at cold enough temperatures they've got a unity molar fraction so you can dissolve as much of one in the other as you'd like.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Oh, right. So the significantly different densities of ethanol and water are why vodka stratifies into two layers. Now I understa... What was that? Vodka doesn't stratify, you say?
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago












    • 3




      $begingroup$
      Furthermore at liquid oxygen temperatures, methane is solid. It might be possible to put them both in the liquid phase by using higher pressures, but still sounds like a very bad situation.
      $endgroup$
      – Blake Walsh
      yesterday






    • 7




      $begingroup$
      -1 for several problems. 1) answer is based on the wrong gas to try to make a false point about different densities. 2) answer uses false analogy because oil and water do not mix due to molecular incompatibility (oil is hydrophobic), it's got nothing to do with density, 3) answer forwards false science that density difference is the reason liquids could not mix.
      $endgroup$
      – uhoh
      yesterday







    • 7




      $begingroup$
      It would stratify into CO2, H2O and debris
      $endgroup$
      – Ingolifs
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Liquids only stratify if they're immiscible. LOX and methane dissolve in each other; at cold enough temperatures they've got a unity molar fraction so you can dissolve as much of one in the other as you'd like.
      $endgroup$
      – Bob Jacobsen
      yesterday






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      Oh, right. So the significantly different densities of ethanol and water are why vodka stratifies into two layers. Now I understa... What was that? Vodka doesn't stratify, you say?
      $endgroup$
      – David Richerby
      17 hours ago







    3




    3




    $begingroup$
    Furthermore at liquid oxygen temperatures, methane is solid. It might be possible to put them both in the liquid phase by using higher pressures, but still sounds like a very bad situation.
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Walsh
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    Furthermore at liquid oxygen temperatures, methane is solid. It might be possible to put them both in the liquid phase by using higher pressures, but still sounds like a very bad situation.
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Walsh
    yesterday




    7




    7




    $begingroup$
    -1 for several problems. 1) answer is based on the wrong gas to try to make a false point about different densities. 2) answer uses false analogy because oil and water do not mix due to molecular incompatibility (oil is hydrophobic), it's got nothing to do with density, 3) answer forwards false science that density difference is the reason liquids could not mix.
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday





    $begingroup$
    -1 for several problems. 1) answer is based on the wrong gas to try to make a false point about different densities. 2) answer uses false analogy because oil and water do not mix due to molecular incompatibility (oil is hydrophobic), it's got nothing to do with density, 3) answer forwards false science that density difference is the reason liquids could not mix.
    $endgroup$
    – uhoh
    yesterday





    7




    7




    $begingroup$
    It would stratify into CO2, H2O and debris
    $endgroup$
    – Ingolifs
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    It would stratify into CO2, H2O and debris
    $endgroup$
    – Ingolifs
    yesterday




    4




    4




    $begingroup$
    Liquids only stratify if they're immiscible. LOX and methane dissolve in each other; at cold enough temperatures they've got a unity molar fraction so you can dissolve as much of one in the other as you'd like.
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Jacobsen
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    Liquids only stratify if they're immiscible. LOX and methane dissolve in each other; at cold enough temperatures they've got a unity molar fraction so you can dissolve as much of one in the other as you'd like.
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Jacobsen
    yesterday




    4




    4




    $begingroup$
    Oh, right. So the significantly different densities of ethanol and water are why vodka stratifies into two layers. Now I understa... What was that? Vodka doesn't stratify, you say?
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    17 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Oh, right. So the significantly different densities of ethanol and water are why vodka stratifies into two layers. Now I understa... What was that? Vodka doesn't stratify, you say?
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    17 hours ago











    9












    $begingroup$

    On the chemical/physical question of whether such a mixture can exist: Yes it can.



    There's a NASA report that looks into this: "ON THE SOLUBILITIES AND RATES OF SOLUTION OF GASES IN LIQUID METHANE", Hibbard and Evans, 1968 and concludes that such mixtures are possible.



    Starting on page 8:




    Figure 5(a) presents the curves for oxygen, argon, carbon monoxide,
    and nitrogen. Also shown are the two experimental values for nitrogen.
    Agreement is excellent at 99.83K and good at 110.9K. The curves for
    these gases show that solubility should decrease with increasing
    temperature and the nitrogen data confirm this. This figure shows the
    mole fraction solubility of oxygen to be 1.0 at 90K. This means that
    oxygen, which has a normal boiling temperature of 90.1K would
    continuously condense in, and be miscible in all proportions, with
    liquid methane at 90K.
    This is confirmed by reference 11 where, in a
    study of the solubility of methane in liquid oxygen, it was concluded
    that these formed a near-ideal solution at -297 F (90K)




    (emphasis added)



    Figure 5 is reproduced below. Note how the solubility of oxygen rises rapidly as temperature drops.



    Reference 11 mentioned in there is "Hydrocarbon-Oxygen Systems Solubility", McKinley and Wang, 1960 (unfortunately paywalled) which also has interesting discussion of the stability (i.e. presence or absence of a tendency to explode) of various mixtures. That covers, in delightfully calm terms, why such mixtures are not commonly used: "A composition as pictured at point A (n.b. mostly one component) is safe whereas the composition at point B (i.e. rocket fuel) can be exploded".



    enter image description here






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      9












      $begingroup$

      On the chemical/physical question of whether such a mixture can exist: Yes it can.



      There's a NASA report that looks into this: "ON THE SOLUBILITIES AND RATES OF SOLUTION OF GASES IN LIQUID METHANE", Hibbard and Evans, 1968 and concludes that such mixtures are possible.



      Starting on page 8:




      Figure 5(a) presents the curves for oxygen, argon, carbon monoxide,
      and nitrogen. Also shown are the two experimental values for nitrogen.
      Agreement is excellent at 99.83K and good at 110.9K. The curves for
      these gases show that solubility should decrease with increasing
      temperature and the nitrogen data confirm this. This figure shows the
      mole fraction solubility of oxygen to be 1.0 at 90K. This means that
      oxygen, which has a normal boiling temperature of 90.1K would
      continuously condense in, and be miscible in all proportions, with
      liquid methane at 90K.
      This is confirmed by reference 11 where, in a
      study of the solubility of methane in liquid oxygen, it was concluded
      that these formed a near-ideal solution at -297 F (90K)




      (emphasis added)



      Figure 5 is reproduced below. Note how the solubility of oxygen rises rapidly as temperature drops.



      Reference 11 mentioned in there is "Hydrocarbon-Oxygen Systems Solubility", McKinley and Wang, 1960 (unfortunately paywalled) which also has interesting discussion of the stability (i.e. presence or absence of a tendency to explode) of various mixtures. That covers, in delightfully calm terms, why such mixtures are not commonly used: "A composition as pictured at point A (n.b. mostly one component) is safe whereas the composition at point B (i.e. rocket fuel) can be exploded".



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        9












        9








        9





        $begingroup$

        On the chemical/physical question of whether such a mixture can exist: Yes it can.



        There's a NASA report that looks into this: "ON THE SOLUBILITIES AND RATES OF SOLUTION OF GASES IN LIQUID METHANE", Hibbard and Evans, 1968 and concludes that such mixtures are possible.



        Starting on page 8:




        Figure 5(a) presents the curves for oxygen, argon, carbon monoxide,
        and nitrogen. Also shown are the two experimental values for nitrogen.
        Agreement is excellent at 99.83K and good at 110.9K. The curves for
        these gases show that solubility should decrease with increasing
        temperature and the nitrogen data confirm this. This figure shows the
        mole fraction solubility of oxygen to be 1.0 at 90K. This means that
        oxygen, which has a normal boiling temperature of 90.1K would
        continuously condense in, and be miscible in all proportions, with
        liquid methane at 90K.
        This is confirmed by reference 11 where, in a
        study of the solubility of methane in liquid oxygen, it was concluded
        that these formed a near-ideal solution at -297 F (90K)




        (emphasis added)



        Figure 5 is reproduced below. Note how the solubility of oxygen rises rapidly as temperature drops.



        Reference 11 mentioned in there is "Hydrocarbon-Oxygen Systems Solubility", McKinley and Wang, 1960 (unfortunately paywalled) which also has interesting discussion of the stability (i.e. presence or absence of a tendency to explode) of various mixtures. That covers, in delightfully calm terms, why such mixtures are not commonly used: "A composition as pictured at point A (n.b. mostly one component) is safe whereas the composition at point B (i.e. rocket fuel) can be exploded".



        enter image description here






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        On the chemical/physical question of whether such a mixture can exist: Yes it can.



        There's a NASA report that looks into this: "ON THE SOLUBILITIES AND RATES OF SOLUTION OF GASES IN LIQUID METHANE", Hibbard and Evans, 1968 and concludes that such mixtures are possible.



        Starting on page 8:




        Figure 5(a) presents the curves for oxygen, argon, carbon monoxide,
        and nitrogen. Also shown are the two experimental values for nitrogen.
        Agreement is excellent at 99.83K and good at 110.9K. The curves for
        these gases show that solubility should decrease with increasing
        temperature and the nitrogen data confirm this. This figure shows the
        mole fraction solubility of oxygen to be 1.0 at 90K. This means that
        oxygen, which has a normal boiling temperature of 90.1K would
        continuously condense in, and be miscible in all proportions, with
        liquid methane at 90K.
        This is confirmed by reference 11 where, in a
        study of the solubility of methane in liquid oxygen, it was concluded
        that these formed a near-ideal solution at -297 F (90K)




        (emphasis added)



        Figure 5 is reproduced below. Note how the solubility of oxygen rises rapidly as temperature drops.



        Reference 11 mentioned in there is "Hydrocarbon-Oxygen Systems Solubility", McKinley and Wang, 1960 (unfortunately paywalled) which also has interesting discussion of the stability (i.e. presence or absence of a tendency to explode) of various mixtures. That covers, in delightfully calm terms, why such mixtures are not commonly used: "A composition as pictured at point A (n.b. mostly one component) is safe whereas the composition at point B (i.e. rocket fuel) can be exploded".



        enter image description here







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered yesterday









        Bob JacobsenBob Jacobsen

        5,6851128




        5,6851128





















            6












            $begingroup$

            For the static fire test of AMOS-6 it is believed that the oxygen and RP1 fuel combined together due to a failed bulkhead. Even a smaller bit of fuel in oxidizer can cause enough of an explosion to start things moving, part of the reaction was with the carbon overwrap and oxygen, which had a small spark and started the larger explosion seen. In your proposed condition, only a small spark is required to cause a large explosion, as seen in the below video.








            Mixing fuel and oxidizer is bad, even the slightest spark will cause it all to go up in flames. Plus there is a lot of things that can be done to optimize the flow for different conditions, flowing more oxidizer or fuel for certain conditions.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Yes, but it was only an anomaly. :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Now imagine that happening orders of magnitude faster due to premixing. It’s essentially a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor of several thousand.
              $endgroup$
              – Bob Jacobsen
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX. The bulkhead failed later, due to the violent reaction between the carbon overwrap + LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Bob Jacobsen, this may be the key! Propose to the Pentagon it can be weaponized, that finding a way to mix and store methalox would produce "a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor several thousand." Mega-funding will ensue. :-) :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday















            6












            $begingroup$

            For the static fire test of AMOS-6 it is believed that the oxygen and RP1 fuel combined together due to a failed bulkhead. Even a smaller bit of fuel in oxidizer can cause enough of an explosion to start things moving, part of the reaction was with the carbon overwrap and oxygen, which had a small spark and started the larger explosion seen. In your proposed condition, only a small spark is required to cause a large explosion, as seen in the below video.








            Mixing fuel and oxidizer is bad, even the slightest spark will cause it all to go up in flames. Plus there is a lot of things that can be done to optimize the flow for different conditions, flowing more oxidizer or fuel for certain conditions.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Yes, but it was only an anomaly. :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Now imagine that happening orders of magnitude faster due to premixing. It’s essentially a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor of several thousand.
              $endgroup$
              – Bob Jacobsen
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX. The bulkhead failed later, due to the violent reaction between the carbon overwrap + LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Bob Jacobsen, this may be the key! Propose to the Pentagon it can be weaponized, that finding a way to mix and store methalox would produce "a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor several thousand." Mega-funding will ensue. :-) :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday













            6












            6








            6





            $begingroup$

            For the static fire test of AMOS-6 it is believed that the oxygen and RP1 fuel combined together due to a failed bulkhead. Even a smaller bit of fuel in oxidizer can cause enough of an explosion to start things moving, part of the reaction was with the carbon overwrap and oxygen, which had a small spark and started the larger explosion seen. In your proposed condition, only a small spark is required to cause a large explosion, as seen in the below video.








            Mixing fuel and oxidizer is bad, even the slightest spark will cause it all to go up in flames. Plus there is a lot of things that can be done to optimize the flow for different conditions, flowing more oxidizer or fuel for certain conditions.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            For the static fire test of AMOS-6 it is believed that the oxygen and RP1 fuel combined together due to a failed bulkhead. Even a smaller bit of fuel in oxidizer can cause enough of an explosion to start things moving, part of the reaction was with the carbon overwrap and oxygen, which had a small spark and started the larger explosion seen. In your proposed condition, only a small spark is required to cause a large explosion, as seen in the below video.








            Mixing fuel and oxidizer is bad, even the slightest spark will cause it all to go up in flames. Plus there is a lot of things that can be done to optimize the flow for different conditions, flowing more oxidizer or fuel for certain conditions.















            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 15 hours ago

























            answered yesterday









            PearsonArtPhotoPearsonArtPhoto

            83.3k16239455




            83.3k16239455







            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Yes, but it was only an anomaly. :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Now imagine that happening orders of magnitude faster due to premixing. It’s essentially a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor of several thousand.
              $endgroup$
              – Bob Jacobsen
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX. The bulkhead failed later, due to the violent reaction between the carbon overwrap + LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Bob Jacobsen, this may be the key! Propose to the Pentagon it can be weaponized, that finding a way to mix and store methalox would produce "a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor several thousand." Mega-funding will ensue. :-) :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday












            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Yes, but it was only an anomaly. :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Now imagine that happening orders of magnitude faster due to premixing. It’s essentially a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor of several thousand.
              $endgroup$
              – Bob Jacobsen
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX. The bulkhead failed later, due to the violent reaction between the carbon overwrap + LOX.
              $endgroup$
              – uhoh
              yesterday






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Bob Jacobsen, this may be the key! Propose to the Pentagon it can be weaponized, that finding a way to mix and store methalox would produce "a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor several thousand." Mega-funding will ensue. :-) :-)
              $endgroup$
              – SpaceInMyHead
              yesterday







            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            Yes, but it was only an anomaly. :-)
            $endgroup$
            – SpaceInMyHead
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            Yes, but it was only an anomaly. :-)
            $endgroup$
            – SpaceInMyHead
            yesterday




            4




            4




            $begingroup$
            Now imagine that happening orders of magnitude faster due to premixing. It’s essentially a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor of several thousand.
            $endgroup$
            – Bob Jacobsen
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            Now imagine that happening orders of magnitude faster due to premixing. It’s essentially a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor of several thousand.
            $endgroup$
            – Bob Jacobsen
            yesterday




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX.
            $endgroup$
            – uhoh
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX.
            $endgroup$
            – uhoh
            yesterday




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX. The bulkhead failed later, due to the violent reaction between the carbon overwrap + LOX.
            $endgroup$
            – uhoh
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            Ignition happened between the carbon overwrap of the helium tanks inside the LOX tank, not between RP-1 and LOX. The bulkhead failed later, due to the violent reaction between the carbon overwrap + LOX.
            $endgroup$
            – uhoh
            yesterday




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            Bob Jacobsen, this may be the key! Propose to the Pentagon it can be weaponized, that finding a way to mix and store methalox would produce "a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor several thousand." Mega-funding will ensue. :-) :-)
            $endgroup$
            – SpaceInMyHead
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            Bob Jacobsen, this may be the key! Propose to the Pentagon it can be weaponized, that finding a way to mix and store methalox would produce "a fuel-air explosive enhanced by a factor several thousand." Mega-funding will ensue. :-) :-)
            $endgroup$
            – SpaceInMyHead
            yesterday

















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f34973%2fpre-mixing-cryogenic-fuels-and-using-only-one-fuel-tank%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            getting Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender working in the command lineHow to connect to CheckPoint VPN on Ubuntu 18.04LTS?Will the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxLinux Checkpoint SNX tool configuration issuesCheck Point - Connect under Linux - snx + OTPSNX VPN Ububuntu 18.XXUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificateVPN with network manager (nm-applet) is not workingWill the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayImport VPN config files to NetworkManager from command lineTrouble connecting to VPN using network-manager, while command line worksStart a VPN connection with PPTP protocol on command linestarting a docker service daemon breaks the vpn networkCan't connect to vpn with Network-managerVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificate

            NetworkManager fails with “Could not find source connection”Trouble connecting to VPN using network-manager, while command line worksHow can I be notified about state changes to a VPN adapterBacktrack 5 R3 - Refuses to connect to VPNFeed all traffic through OpenVPN for a specific network namespace onlyRun daemon on startup in Debian once openvpn connection establishedpfsense tcp connection between openvpn and lan is brokenInternet connection problem with web browsers onlyWhy does NetworkManager explicitly support tun/tap devices?Browser issues with VPNTwo IP addresses assigned to the same network card - OpenVPN issues?Cannot connect to WiFi with nmcli, although secrets are provided

            대한민국 목차 국명 지리 역사 정치 국방 경제 사회 문화 국제 순위 관련 항목 각주 외부 링크 둘러보기 메뉴북위 37° 34′ 08″ 동경 126° 58′ 36″ / 북위 37.568889° 동경 126.976667°  / 37.568889; 126.976667ehThe Korean Repository문단을 편집문단을 편집추가해Clarkson PLC 사Report for Selected Countries and Subjects-Korea“Human Development Index and its components: P.198”“http://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD%EA%B5%AD%EA%B8%B0%EB%B2%95”"한국은 국제법상 한반도 유일 합법정부 아니다" - 오마이뉴스 모바일Report for Selected Countries and Subjects: South Korea격동의 역사와 함께한 조선일보 90년 : 조선일보 인수해 혁신시킨 신석우, 임시정부 때는 '대한민국' 국호(國號) 정해《우리가 몰랐던 우리 역사: 나라 이름의 비밀을 찾아가는 역사 여행》“남북 공식호칭 ‘남한’‘북한’으로 쓴다”“Corea 대 Korea, 누가 이긴 거야?”국내기후자료 - 한국[김대중 前 대통령 서거] 과감한 구조개혁 'DJ노믹스'로 최단기간 환란극복 :: 네이버 뉴스“이라크 "韓-쿠르드 유전개발 MOU 승인 안해"(종합)”“해외 우리국민 추방사례 43%가 일본”차기전차 K2'흑표'의 세계 최고 전력 분석, 쿠키뉴스 엄기영, 2007-03-02두산인프라, 헬기잡는 장갑차 'K21'...내년부터 공급, 고뉴스 이대준, 2008-10-30과거 내용 찾기mk 뉴스 - 구매력 기준으로 보면 한국 1인당 소득 3만弗과거 내용 찾기"The N-11: More Than an Acronym"Archived조선일보 최우석, 2008-11-01Global 500 2008: Countries - South Korea“몇년째 '시한폭탄'... 가계부채, 올해는 터질까”가구당 부채 5000만원 처음 넘어서“‘빚’으로 내몰리는 사회.. 위기의 가계대출”“[경제365] 공공부문 부채 급증…800조 육박”“"소득 양극화 다소 완화...불평등은 여전"”“공정사회·공생발전 한참 멀었네”iSuppli,08年2QのDRAMシェア・ランキングを発表(08/8/11)South Korea dominates shipbuilding industry | Stock Market News & Stocks to Watch from StraightStocks한국 자동차 생산, 3년 연속 세계 5위자동차수출 '현대-삼성 웃고 기아-대우-쌍용은 울고' 과거 내용 찾기동반성장위 창립 1주년 맞아Archived"중기적합 3개업종 합의 무시한 채 선정"李대통령, 사업 무분별 확장 소상공인 생계 위협 질타삼성-LG, 서민업종인 빵·분식사업 잇따라 철수상생은 뒷전…SSM ‘몸집 불리기’ 혈안Archived“경부고속도에 '아시안하이웨이' 표지판”'철의 실크로드' 앞서 '말(言)의 실크로드'부터, 프레시안 정창현, 2008-10-01“'서울 지하철은 안전한가?'”“서울시 “올해 안에 모든 지하철역 스크린도어 설치””“부산지하철 1,2호선 승강장 안전펜스 설치 완료”“전교조, 정부 노조 통계서 처음 빠져”“[Weekly BIZ] 도요타 '제로 이사회'가 리콜 사태 불러들였다”“S Korea slams high tuition costs”““정치가 여론 양극화 부채질… 합리주의 절실””“〈"`촛불집회'는 민주주의의 질적 변화 상징"〉”““촛불집회가 민주주의 왜곡 초래””“국민 65%, "한국 노사관계 대립적"”“한국 국가경쟁력 27위‥노사관계 '꼴찌'”“제대로 형성되지 않은 대한민국 이념지형”“[신년기획-갈등의 시대] 갈등지수 OECD 4위…사회적 손실 GDP 27% 무려 300조”“2012 총선-대선의 키워드는 '국민과 소통'”“한국 삶의 질 27위, 2000년과 2008년 연속 하위권 머물러”“[해피 코리아] 행복점수 68점…해외 평가선 '낙제점'”“한국 어린이·청소년 행복지수 3년 연속 OECD ‘꼴찌’”“한국 이혼율 OECD중 8위”“[통계청] 한국 이혼율 OECD 4위”“오피니언 [이렇게 생각한다] `부부의 날` 에 돌아본 이혼율 1위 한국”“Suicide Rates by Country, Global Health Observatory Data Repository.”“1. 또 다른 차별”“오피니언 [편집자에게] '왕따'와 '패거리 정치' 심리는 닮은꼴”“[미래한국리포트] 무한경쟁에 빠진 대한민국”“대학생 98% "외모가 경쟁력이라는 말 동의"”“특급호텔 웨딩·200만원대 유모차… "남보다 더…" 호화病, 고질병 됐다”“[스트레스 공화국] ① 경쟁사회, 스트레스 쌓인다”““매일 30여명 자살 한국, 의사보다 무속인에…””“"자살 부르는 '우울증', 환자 중 85% 치료 안 받아"”“정신병원을 가다”“대한민국도 ‘묻지마 범죄’,안전지대 아니다”“유엔 "학생 '성적 지향'에 따른 차별 금지하라"”“유엔아동권리위원회 보고서 및 번역본 원문”“고졸 성공스토리 담은 '제빵왕 김탁구' 드라마 나온다”“‘빛 좋은 개살구’ 고졸 취업…실습 대신 착취”원본 문서“정신건강, 사회적 편견부터 고쳐드립니다”‘소통’과 ‘행복’에 목 마른 사회가 잠들어 있던 ‘심리학’ 깨웠다“[포토] 사유리-곽금주 교수의 유쾌한 심리상담”“"올해 한국인 평균 영화관람횟수 세계 1위"(종합)”“[게임연중기획] 게임은 문화다-여가활동 1순위 게임”“영화속 ‘영어 지상주의’ …“왠지 씁쓸한데””“2월 `신문 부수 인증기관` 지정..방송법 후속작업”“무료신문 성장동력 ‘차별성’과 ‘갈등해소’”대한민국 국회 법률지식정보시스템"Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project: South Korea"“amp;vwcd=MT_ZTITLE&path=인구·가구%20>%20인구총조사%20>%20인구부문%20>%20 총조사인구(2005)%20>%20전수부문&oper_YN=Y&item=&keyword=종교별%20인구& amp;lang_mode=kor&list_id= 2005년 통계청 인구 총조사”원본 문서“한국인이 좋아하는 취미와 운동 (2004-2009)”“한국인이 좋아하는 취미와 운동 (2004-2014)”Archived“한국, `부분적 언론자유국' 강등〈프리덤하우스〉”“국경없는기자회 "한국, 인터넷감시 대상국"”“한국, 조선산업 1위 유지(S. Korea Stays Top Shipbuilding Nation) RZD-Partner Portal”원본 문서“한국, 4년 만에 ‘선박건조 1위’”“옛 마산시,인터넷속도 세계 1위”“"한국 초고속 인터넷망 세계1위"”“인터넷·휴대폰 요금, 외국보다 훨씬 비싸”“한국 관세행정 6년 연속 세계 '1위'”“한국 교통사고 사망자 수 OECD 회원국 중 2위”“결핵 후진국' 한국, 환자가 급증한 이유는”“수술은 신중해야… 자칫하면 생명 위협”대한민국분류대한민국의 지도대한민국 정부대표 다국어포털대한민국 전자정부대한민국 국회한국방송공사about korea and information korea브리태니커 백과사전(한국편)론리플래닛의 정보(한국편)CIA의 세계 정보(한국편)마리암 부디아 (Mariam Budia),『한국: 하늘이 내린 한 폭의 그림』, 서울: 트랜스라틴 19호 (2012년 3월)대한민국ehehehehehehehehehehehehehehWorldCat132441370n791268020000 0001 2308 81034078029-6026373548cb11863345f(데이터)00573706ge128495