Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
~ 171655
1 ~i Background of the Invention
I With the world~s supply of petroleum dirninishing, much
¦ emphasis has been placed on finding substitutes for fuels such as~
gasoline which are derived from petroleum. For example, a com-
bination of gasoline and ethyl alcohol gometimes called "gasohol"
has been widely heralded because it lowers the amount of gasoline
required to run an internal combustion engine. Of course, gaso-
hol contains a large amount of gasoline (90%). It would, of
course, be desirable to find a substitute for gasoline which does
not employ any pe~roleum derivatives at all. The use of straight
ethanol as an engine fuel has been explored. This approach,
however, suffers from a number of deficiencies, one of which is
¦I that the principal source of ethanol is grain which would other-
¦ wise be directed to food products. Of course, if the efficiency
of ethanol could be improved, its use would be more attractive.
It would, of course, be highly desirable to utilize
coal as a fuel for powering automobiles and other vehicles. One
method suggested for utilizing coal as a fuel for internal com-
bustion engines involves converting the coal to methanol. A
suggested use for methanol is to add it to gasoline to make a
fuel similar to gasohol. As an additive or extender for gaso-
line, methanol could fulfill a function similar to that of
ethanol; but, adding methanol to gasoline presents problems. If
even a small quantity of water gets into an automobile tank, a
methanol-gasoline blend will separate. The methanol and water
fall to the bottom of the tank, get into the engine and stall it.
The use of straight methanol as a fuel has been
suggested. With minor modif~cations to the engine, such as
! 1~]655
1 raising the engine's compression ratio and adding a heating
¦I system for cold starts, an automobile can run on straight metha- ¦
nol. However, methanol produces only about half the calo~ies perj
gallon as conventional gasoline. In connection with the
foregoing, the heat of combustion figures for gasoline and metha-
nol appear below:
Gasoline: 10.5 kilocalories per gram
Methanol: 4.7 kilocalories per gram
The significance of the foregoing is tha~ studies anti-
cipate that the price at the plant gate for converting coal to
methanol is about 55-65% of the retail price of gasoline. Thus,
unless the combustion characteristics of methanol is somehow
improved, it would not be competitive with gasoline as it is pre-
¦ sently priced. It would, of course, be highly desirable to
increase the combustion characteristics of methanol so that it
would be economical to use methanol as a substitute for gasoline.
Of course, it should also be noted that in addition to producing
methanol synthetically from coal, it can also be produced from
forest and farm wastes such as wood chips, garbage, plant stocks
and manure.
Summary of the Invention
In accordance with the present invention, the proper-
tie~ of methanol and ethanol ~or other lower alcohols) as a fuel
for an internal combustion engine are yreatly improved by an
additive which is an alkyl peroxide. Accordingly, an object of
the present invention is to provide a methanol or ethanol (and
other lower alcohols~ based fuel which can be utilized as a
substitute in whole or in part for gasoline as a fuel for an
30 internal combustion engine~
~`
~ -3~
~ 1 71655
l l l
1 ¦~ Brief Description of the Drawin~
The sole figure of the arawing is a graph showing
increase in miles per gallon versus percent of DTBP by volume.
Description of the Preferred Ernbodiments
At the outset, the present invention is described in
its broadest overall aspects with a more detailed description
following. In its broadest overall aspect, the present invention
is a fuel composition for an internal combustion engine. It
includes methanol or ethanol or other lower alcohols and an addi-
tive. The fuel composition may be utilized directly as a fuelfor a typical gasoline engine or it may be mixed with gasoline in
any proportion for use in such engines.
The additive itself is an alkyl peroxide. The pre-
ferred alkyl peroxide is a ditertiary alkyl peroxide of the
general formula:
I 1 R6
R2 - F ~ - O - IC - R5
R3 ~4
where Rl through R6 are lower alkyl radical~.
The most preferred additive is di-t-butyl peroxide of
the formula:
CH3 ICH3
CH3 - C - O - O - C - CH3
CH3 CH3
Tertiary alkyl hydroperoxides having the following
formula may also be used:
; _4_
,
1 171655
Rl
R2 - C - O - O - H ,
R3
where Rl to R3 are lower alkyl radicals.
The preferred alkyl hydroperoxide is t-butyl hydro-
peroxide of the formula:
C13
CH3 - C -
CH3
¦ In accordance with the present invention, it has been
¦ discovered that an appropriate mixture of peroxides and methanol
¦ produces a fuel composition which burns with approximately double
the efficiency of straight methanol giving approximately the same
miles per gallon as gasoline. ~lowever, this fuel composition has
combustion characteristics which can produce auto-ignition and
accompanying knocking in a conventional gasoline engine. This
problem, of course, can be overcome by engine design. However,
¦ to overcome this problem with existing engines, it has been
discovered that a quantity of water and isopropanol when added to
the fuel composition results in a fuel that can be substituted
for conventional petroIeum fuels or mixed with ~hem as an
extender without producing auto-ignition or knocking.
Furthermorej the isopropanol reduces problems associated with
water-methanol mixtures.
Test~ with methanol also indicate that the peroxide
; additives will improve the performance of straight ethanol and
30 gasohol.
. ~.~
! 171 65~
1 Thus, the fuel composition of the present invention is
a mixture of methanol and/or ethanol and a peroxide, but may con-
tain additives to improve the overall charac-teristics and
¦ performance of the fuelO
The use of peroxides as additives for fuel has been
suggested. For example, U.S. Patent No. 1,766,501 to Buerk
entitled "Liquid Combustible" discloses adding peroxides in
general to improve the combustion effect of gasoline.
U.S. Patent No. 3,108,864 to Barusch entitled "Engine
Starting Fluid" describes the mixture of large quantities of
dimethyl peroxide with diethyl ether as a starting primer for
gasoline engines under sub-~reezing conditions.
U.SO Patent Nos. 2,011,297 to Moser entitled "Process
¦ for Preparing Motor Fuel"; 2,092,322 to Moser entitled "Process
for the Production of Organic Peroxides"; 2,093,008 to Egerton
entitled "Fuel for Internal Combustion Engines"; 2,107,059 to
Moser entitled "Motor Fuel Composition"; 2,174,680 to Badertscher
et al. entitled i'Diesel Fuel"; 2,240,145 to Moser entitled "Motor
Fuel Composition" and 2,891,851 to Bailey et al. entitlsd "Fuel
for Internal Combustion Engines" disclose the use of peroxides as
additives to diesel fuels.
U.S. Patent No. 2,696,806 to Mingle, Jr. entitled
"Removal of Combustion Chamber Deposits in Spark-Ignition
Engines" discloses adding a peroxide to a fuel for removing depo
sits in spark-ignition enginesO
U.S. Patent No. 3,869,262 to Mayerhoffer et al.
entitled nF~el and ~dditive for the Production Thereof" is
I t71655
1 I illustrative of a large number of patents disclosing the use of
isopropanol in gasoline.
In accordance with the present invention, the fuel com-
position preferably contains about 1.5-6~ peroxide with the
balance being substantially methanol. As used throughouk this
specification and claims, all percentages are by volume at room
temperature unless otherwise specified. To this composition,
other additives may be added. The composition may be used
straight or mixed with gasoline in any proportion. Also, all or
part of the methanol may be replaced by ethanol to yield an
improved fuel.
In accordance with the present invention, the following
tests were run using a 1973 Lincoln Continental. The series of
experiments indicated that a proper mixtur~ of a peroxide with
methanol, plus a minox adjustment in the carburetor, eliminates
the problems of methanol-gasoline mixtures.
1. Mileage
A di-tertiary alkyl peroxide (specifically di-tertiary
butyl peroxide) and methanol was blended. A mixture of 10%
peroxide and 90~ methanol was quite efficient but it was found
, that a 15%-85~ mixture was a more optimum ratio. ~he viscosity
of this mixture, being higher than gasoline, necessitated a
change in the size of the Lincoln carburetor jets from 61
; thousandths to 69 thousandths. With this size jet the peroxide
mixture flows freely throu~h the carburetorO This was the only
modification made on the Lincoln for all experiments.
August 12, 1979 - Drove the Lincoln 120 D B miles using
10.3 gallons of regular 89 octane gasoline, giving a mileage of
11.73 miles per gallon.
!I- '171655
1 ~ August 30, 1979 - Drove 104.5 miles using 9 gallons of
¦ a 50-50 blend of methanol 85-peroxide 15 with regular 89 octane
¦¦ gasoline, giving a mileage of 11.61 miles per gallon.
Both tests were run under similar conditions indicatiny
that the mixture had approximately the same mileage as gasoline.
2. __eparation of the Mixture with Wat~r
September 21, 1979 - ~dded 3 oz. of water to 1 gallon
of a 50-50 blend of methanol 85, peroxide 15 with 93 octane no
lead gasoline. The water separated the mixture into 2 layers.
Unexpectedly the peroxide, although more soluble in gasoline,
stayed with the methanol and water~ The mixture, in its
separated form, was then added to the test tank installed in the
Lincoln~ The Lincoln, taken out on the road, ran perfectly with
the separated mixture. The Lincoln also ran perfectly with a
mixture of methanol and peroxide with water, but no gasoline.
3. Cold Start
The addition of di-tertiary butyl peroxide to methanol
starts a cold motor more easily than does straight methanol.
This test is merely indicative and not conclusive since it was
done in warm Florida weather. -
, 4. ~nissions
The emissions from the Lincoln were tested September
21, 1979 with the following results:
(Present Government Specifications, at idling speed:less than 400 P.P.M. Hydrocarbons
less than 2% Carbon Monoxide)
1 17165S
1 I Methanol Peroxide 85-15 mixture:
60 P.P.M, Hydrocarbons
0.1~ Carbon Monoxide
Compare: Texaco no lead 87 octane gas:
250 P~P~Mr Hydrocarbons
10% Carbon Monoxide
l ~
Amoco no lead hi-test g3 octane gas:
180 P.P.M. Hydrocarbons
7% Carbon Monoxide
1 50/50 mixture o Amoco no lead hi-test 93 octane gas with 8~-15
Methanol-Peroxide mixture:
100 P.P.M. Hydrocarbons
2 ~ 6% Carbon Monoxide
Many tests were run with the Lincoln. There was no
noticeable difference with gaskets or hoses.
Although the di-tertiary alkyl peroxides are among the
most stable of all the commercially available organic peroxides,
the stability of a methanol-peroxide mixture over a long period
of time was a concern. One gallon of methanol 85-ditertiary
butyl peroxide 15 mixutre was blended in a tin can on May 17,
1977, and stored until September 22, 1979. In the test tank on
the Lincoln, it gave approximately identical mileage as the same
guantity of newly blended mixture. On the same day, September
22, 1979, the same quantity of straight methanol yielded 1/2 the
mileage of above old and new mixtures.
~he invention iæ further illustrated by the following
non-limiting examplesO
_g_
i71~5S
1 Experiments 18(B) and 18(C~
Here is demonstrated the fact that by admixture of di-t-butyl
peroxide ana methanol (ratio 15/~5 by volume), mi~eage is
increased by 61~ over that of burning methanol alone (5.96 mpg
versus 9.60 mpg)
Experiments 16 and 18(H)
The data in these two experiments would suggest that gasoline
diluted 50% with a 45/5 mixture of methanol and DTBP will give
about 91% of the mileage produced by gasoline alone.
Experiments 17(B) and 18(C)
The data suggest the possibili~y ~hat something of the order of
an 80/20 or 75/25 mix of methanol/DTBP might give bettPr mileage
than en 85/15 mixture.
- I 17165~
"
~ ~ .. ~
m 17 0 R 0 ~ al R07 R 0
~Y ,C
R
~ S~
E~
12: ~D ID 0 ~D
~ J U ~
~: a) u~
r~ r~
s~n
~1 o c~ ~ o o . .
~1 ~ . ~
I o a~ ~,
_ _ _ _ _
Q~ r` 0 ~ 0 o
E~ ~ r ~
'E~ u~
0
~ o u a~ o u~
_~ u~ o ~
~ ~`I N ~ N t~
O O I I I O
la _l
Pl .
m ~ c:
E~ ~ I
~ : ~::
_,
o U~ o o U~ I
a~ o co I
5 ~
3 .
~ ~ ~,
:
~ _ _ _ _~r
X ~D ~` CD
~ ~ :
.
.
! 1 716~
1 In addition to the foregoing tests which were performed
on an actual automobile, earlier tests were performed on a small
¦ motor. The details of these tests appear below:
MOTOR: Kohler, Model K91, cast iron, air-cooled, 4 cycles, Bore
2 3/8", Stroke 2", Displacement 8.g6 cu. in., Spark plug gap
setting .025 in., breaker point gap .020 in., Horse power rating
4 HP.
Engine equipped with hand brake (with crude spring
balance guage). Throttle setting at approximately 4,000 rpm with
no load. Attempted to run all mixtures as near 2,500 rpm as
possible using hand brake to slow motor.
Experimen~ #1: Ran 5 oz. Texaco no lead gasoline, reported to be
approximately 91 octane. Speed 2,500 rpm, Brake pressure 3 lbs.,
Time 12 1/3 minutes.
Experiment ~2: Ran mixture 4 1/2 oz. methanol and 1/2 oz. di-
tertiary butyl peroxide. Speed 2,700 rpm, Brake 3 lbs., Time 14
minutes.
Experiment #3: Ran 4 1/4 oz. methanol and 3/4 oz. di-tertiary
butyl peroxide. Speed 2,700 rpm, Brake 3 lbs., Time 15 1/4
minutes.
Experiment #4: Ran 4 1/2 oz. methanol and 1/2 ozO Cumene hydro-
peroxide. Speed 2,700 rpm, Brake 3 lbs., Time 17 3/4 minutas.
(Objectionable sweet odor from exhaust)
Experiment #5: Ran 4 3/4 oz. of #2 mixture and 1/4 oz. water.
Speed 2,000 rpm, Brake 3 lbs., Time 18 3/4 minutes. (had to run
leaner mixture with throttle adjuKtment)
-12-
` 1 ~ 1171~55
1 ¦¦ Experiment #6: Ran 5 oz. methanol with throttle adjustment of
¦¦ #5. Speed 2,600 rpm, Brake 3 lbs~, Time 10 3/4 rninutes.
The following experiments were run at higher speed with
throttle open more and brake used to bring speed to approximately
¦ 3,200 rpm.
Experiment #10: Ran 4 1/2 oz. 190 proof grain alcohol and 1/2
oz. di-tertiary butyl peroxide. Speed 3,200 rpm, Brake 3 1/2
lbs., Time 7 1/2 minutes.
Experiment #12: Ran 5 oz. Texaco no lead gas. Speed 3,200 rpm,
Brake 9 lbs., Time 6 minutes. (Blue smoke emission visible.)
Experiment #13: Ran 5 oz. methanol, open throttle to almost
maximum to obtain nearly same speed with greater brake pressure.
Speed 3,000 rpm, Brake 7 1/2 lbs., Time 5 minutes.
More recent tests run on a General Motor's Chevrolet
Citation have indicated that the most dramatic increase in miles
per gallon for di-t-butyl peroxide (DTBP) and methanol occur with
between 1.5-6% by volume DTBP with even negligible amounts being
effective. As is shown in the sole figure of the drawing at 1%
DTBP the mileaye of methanol increased about two miles per
, gallon. With between 1.5-6% DTBP the increase was between about
six to seven miles per gallon. In the drawing the X's represent
I actual measurements and the 0' 6 are an extrapolation of the
Lincoln results appearing above muyltiplied by 2 to aproximate
Citation mileage results.
The invention may be embodied in other specific forms
without departing from the spirit or essential characteristics
i 171655
1 ¦ thereof. The present embodiments are therefore to be considered
¦ in all respects as illustrative and not restrictive, the scope f
¦ the invention being indicated by the appended claims rather-than
by the ~oregoing description, and all changes which come within
the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are therefore
intended to be embraced therein.
-14-
