Them do I know then something is a combustible or not?

[Jacquesl]

Them do I know then something is a combustible or not?

Water : H20 = Fire killer, normal phase, liquid
Propane : C3H8 = fuel, normal phase, gas
Butane : C4H10 = fuel normal phase, gas
Ethanol : C2H6O = fuel, normal phase, clear liquid
Glucose : C6H12O6 = not sure, normal phase, solid
Glycerol : C3H5(OH)3 = no fuel, normal phase, liquid
Acetone peroxide : C6H12O4 / C9H18O6 = 5300 m/s, normal phase, solid


So my questions are the following:
Why can’t I use glucose to fuel my fire?
Because it all contains Hydrogen, Oxygen and Carbon, and that’s all combustible
And then do you know then something is a solid, liquid or gas, then looking in the chemical structure
Then do you know then something taste as sweet as Glycerol and glucose also by looking into the chemical structure
And how can I modify the structure to make it combustible

 

[Jacquesl]

This happened then you post something on a weekend, LOL

 

[chemisttree]

Glucose burns just fine. As well as cellulose, anyway. (cellulose=polymer of glucose)

The sweet receptor on the tongue is probably known but I can't say for sure. What you are describing is a "structure activity relationship" sometimes abbreviated (beyond recognition) as "SAR".

Try googling SAR or Structure Activity Relationship with Sweet or Taste and see what comes up. Sounds fascinating...

 

[Jacquesl]

Chemisttree, I’m actually more interested in extracting energy out of this stuff. Like glucose, example: I want to power my UPS with glucose.

 

[mrjeffy321]

Glucose will combust, as will glycerol (glycerin), you just need the proper oxidizer.
Mix some Glucose with some KClO3 and the resulting mixture will burn quite readily once ignited.
Pour some glycerin over some KMnO4 and the mixture will spontaneously ignite and burn after a few seconds.
Sometimes you just need a more powerful / concentrated oxidizing agent, or a higher ignition temperature, to burn these denser fuels.

If you want a simplistic way to tell if something will burn, think about what would it make if you did burn it and how likely this reaction is to occur.
For example…how would you burn water? Water is already a normal product of a combustion reaction, it has already been ‘burn’ you might say.
But something like Propane could easily burn. This Hydrocarbon, when combined with Oxygen, will burn to form Carbon Dioxide and water. This process is quite spontaneous once it gets started.

 

[gravenewworld]

Just keep in mind that you need 3 things for a fire. Fuel, oxygen, and heat. If you don't have the right ratio of these 3 things, a fire is not possible.

 

[chemisttree]

why would you want to power a parcel delivery company?

 

[Jacquesl]

why would you want to power a parcel delivery company?

Because it’s on of my biggest whishes, to generate electricity, from the impossible, it’s extremely interesting to me, and I also love it. To play with that wires

And I don’t want to use an ICC engine because it makes to much noise, then that pistons goes up and down, want something quite

 

[Jacquesl]

Glucose will combust, as will glycerol (glycerin), you just need the proper oxidizer.
Mix some Glucose with some KClO3 and the resulting mixture will burn quite readily once ignited.
Pour some glycerin over some KMnO4 and the mixture will spontaneously ignite and burn after a few seconds.
Sometimes you just need a more powerful / concentrated oxidizing agent, or a higher ignition temperature, to burn these denser fuels.

If you want a simplistic way to tell if something will burn, think about what would it make if you did burn it and how likely this reaction is to occur.
For example…how would you burn water? Water is already a normal product of a combustion reaction, it has already been ‘burn’ you might say.
But something like Propane could easily burn. This Hydrocarbon, when combined with Oxygen, will burn to form Carbon Dioxide and water. This process is quite spontaneous once it gets started.

Yip, I was talking about only using atmospheric oxygen without any oxidizers, in that example

I only have potassium chloride (KCl) and not potassium chlorate (KclO3)
And the same with Sodium chloride (NaCl.) – salt
Are where any way of adding O3 to the end and make it an oxidizer?
And I’ve also noticed with Acetone peroxide ( C6H12O4 ) and Glucose (C6H12O6)

C6H12O4 goes @ 5300 m/s but Glucose (C6H12O6) with only some more oxygen bonded but it’s not enough to ignite on it own “without an oxidizer”. If I look at the structure model,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucose

Glucose, starts with black, red and white, carbon in the center, and then goes to Oxygen and then Hydrogen


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetone_peroxide

And with Acetone peroxide, it starts with red, black white, Oxygen in the center, and then Carbon and then Hydrogen.

Is there a change of changing the model structure from a substance?

 

[Jacquesl]

mrjeffy321, I’ve founds your tread, you’ve made 3 years ago “Making Potassium Chlorate”, it’s interesting

 

[Daemonia]

Burn it

how about. 123 propantriol and potassium permanganate. he he .

works like a bomb - even in wet weather.

 

[Jacquesl]

glycerine and potassium permanganate, naah I don't like things that spontaneously ignite and burn after a few seconds

 

[Moonbear]

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye!

I'm going to lock this for now, as it seems to be headed down a path toward ideas of dangerous projects that shouldn't be conducted by amateurs. The other mentors will need to discuss this before a decision is made whether to permanently lock it, or reopen it with some constraints.