Patent Document

RELATED APPLICATIONS 
     This application is a continuation-in-part application of Applicants co-pending application, Ser. No. 236,704, filed Feb. 23, 1981, now abandoned. 
    
    
     BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     1. Field of the Invention 
     This invention relates to improvement in the burning efficiency of liquid fuels such as gasoline, as well as other fuels such as diesel oil, jet fuels, kerosene, naphthas, etc., which are generally used in internal combustion engines of either the piston or rotating turbine type. The provision of non-polluting additives which raise the burning efficiency of these fuels is a desirable goal. 
     2. Discussion of Prior Art 
     The addition of additives to gasoline and similar fuels in order to improve their burning efficiency, is a well known practice. The original and traditional additive, tetraethyl lead, has become disfavored due to its environmentally polluting qualities. Unfortunately, the additives required to obtain similar octane numbers to that obtained from tetraethyl lead requires refining procedures and the use of additives which are fairly expensive. It would therefore be desirable to find a relatively inexpensive commercially available group of additives with high energy content which would serve this purpose. Acetylene and its low molecular weight homologues are a class of energy rich molecules which have been proposed or tested for rocket fuel applications. The energy liberated when acetylene is decomposed to its elements is large and amounts to almost 54 kilocalories per gram. Unfortunately however, acetylenes are rather unstable and have a tendency to explode. Thus, they would not be suitable for this purpose. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     Lower alkynols are more stable than acetylenes and have an affinity for water as well. It has been found found that when lower alkynols have been added to fuels, in particular fuels used in internal combustion engines at ratios of between about 1 to 150 to about 1 to 1000, substantial improvements in gas mileage are obtained. This improvement is of the order of up to about 20% relative to control. The alkynols can be directly added to the fuel in a fuel reservoir. They may be diluted with a suitable carrier and thus added. In those systems which employ a fuel/air premixing means, such as a PCV system, a carburetor or the like, the alkynol may be aspirated into this mixing means by a suitable aspirating means. It has been found that when aspiration is used for the introduction of the alkynol it is preferable that the alkynol be diluted in a suitable carrier, preferably an alkanol which may, if desired, contain a small amount of water. The two foregoing methods of introduction of alkynol into the burning system may be used either separately or together. 
    
    
      BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     FIG. 1 shows an elevational cross sectional schematic view of an aspirating device utilizable in one embodiment of the present invention. 
    
    
     DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
     The alkynols utilized in the present invention are well known compounds which are readily commercially available. There may be employed primary, secondary or tertiary alkynols of the general formula ##STR1## wherein R 1  and R 2  are selected from the group consisting of hydrogen, alkyl, cycloaklyl, or carbocycloaryl, wherein the alkyl groups contain from 1-12, the cycloalkyl contain from 3-12 and the carbocycloaryl groups contain from 5-12 carbon atoms respectively, and R 1  and R 2  may be the same or different. 
     As examples of primary alkynols that may be mentioned 1-propyn-2-ol; 1-butyn-4-ol and 3-hexyn-1-ol. As examples of secondary alkynols that may be mentioned 1-butyn-3-ol; 1-pentyn-3-ol; 4-methyl-1-pentyn-3-ol and 3-phenyl-1-propyn-3-ol. As examples of tertiary alkynols that may be mentioned 3-methyl-1-butyn-3-ol; 3-methyl-1-pentyn-3-ol; 3,5-dimethyl-1-hexyn-3-ol; 3-methyl-1-nonyn-3-ol; 3-phenyl-1-butyn-3-ol and 1-ethynylcyclohexanol. 
     It is especially preferred to utilize tertiary alkynols such as 3-methyl-1-butyn-3-ol and 3-methyl-1-pentyn-3-ol. The increase in efficiency is fairly directly related to the amount of alkynol utilized. Thus, at a ratio of about one part of alkynol to about 150 parts of regular gasoline in the tank (circa. 6 parts of alkynol per 1000 parts of gasoline or about 400 ml. of alkynol per 16 gallons of gasoline), there is noticed a mileage improvement of about four miles/gallon in 20 m.p.g. while at a ratio of 1 to 1020 (0.97 parts per thousand or 200 ml. of alkynol per 16 gallons of gas) the change is only about 1 mile/gallon in 20 miles per gallon. Where the alkynol is aspirated the improvement is even greater. 
     While the invention is not to be considered as limited to the use of about one pint of alkynol per 16 gallons of gas, the use of larger amounts would probably not be cost effective. 
     The alkynols may suitably be compounded with other non-acetylenic additives to economically formulate various fuel additive mixtures. Such additives include alcohols, sitably lower alkanols of 1-5 carbon atoms, such as methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, n-butanol, secondary butanol, tertiary butanol; lower dialkylethers of 1-5 carbon atoms, peralkyl moiety, diethylether, di-n-propylether, diisopropylether, methyl-tertiary-butylether, lower alkanes of 1-10 carbons, n-pentane, n-hexane, n-heptane, isooctane; phenyl lower alkanes such as toluene xylenes and isomers of the preceeding hydrocarbons; N,N-dimetylformamide, N,N-dimethylacetamide, low molecular weight ketones and esters and amines. 
     Where an additive is utilized, the total composition may contain between 5 and 80% alkanol and between 20 and 80% of alkanol and between 0 and 10% of water. The composition which is employed will depend somewhat upon the mode of application of the additive mixture. Thus where the additive mixture is added to the gas tank or other fuel reservoir the composition will be a matter of choice and might well be guided more by other factors, for example, the desirability of reducing fuel line freeze and the like. However, where the additive is used in the aspirator, it is preferable that the amount of alkynol not exceed 50, suitably 46%. Indeed, compositions containing between 10 and 20% of the alkynol are entirely satisfactory. 
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING 
     The aspirator comprises a container 1, suitably of cylindrical shape and constructed of a solvent resistant plastic, of glass, or of metal. The neck of vessel 1 is provided with a closure means 2, suitably a screw top or tight stopper through which are journaled two openings thru which pass tubes 3 and 5. The lower end of tube 3 projects slightly below closure means 2. The upper end is securable into the air flow system of the burning means, for example, PCV return line 4. The tube 5 protrudes into the lower portion of vessel 1 and is provided at the lower end thereof with a fritted or porous sparger piece 7. The upper end of tube 5 is provided with an air needle valve 6. The additive mixture is charged to vessel 1 to a level above sparger piece 7 and below the lower end of tube 3. 
     In the operation of the device the normal air flow thru the PCV system, or any other air intake system reduces the air pressure in the vessel above the additive mixture. This reduced pressure causes air to flow thru needle valve 6 down tube 5 and thru porous sparger 7 thus carrying air saturated with additive into the air space from which it is thence drawn into the engine. The amount of air flow can be controlled by valve 6 in the conventional manner. 
     EXAMPLE I 
     Automobile Tank Mix Additive 
     To 20 gallons of leaded or non-leaded gasoline is added 200-300 ml. (0.053-0.079 gal.) of a typical additive mixture shown below, the composition of which is expressed in volume-percent. 
     
         ______________________________________Formulation AVolume-Percent   Component______________________________________ 5               3-Methyl-1-butyn-3-ol40               Methanol20               Hexane15               Toluene15               Diisopropyl ether 5               N,N--dimethylformamide______________________________________ 
    
     With each new, 20 gallon addition of gasoline to the car tank, a 100-150 ml. portion of the above mixture is added to the gasoline tank. Although the mixture is completely miscible in gasoline and related hydrocarbons, a rocking motion imparted to the car helps facilitate initial mixing. 
     EXAMPLE II 
     Aspirator Formulation 
     The aspirator vessel is filled to approximately 85-90% of capacity with the following mixture: 
     
         ______________________________________Formulation BVolume-Percent   Component______________________________________10               3-Methyl-1-butyn-3-ol20               Isopropanol (20 propanol)40               Methanol25               n-Hexane 5               Water______________________________________ 
    
     EXAMPLE III 
     Further Tank Additive Composition 
     
         ______________________________________Formulation CVolume-Percent   Component______________________________________10               3-Methyl-1-butyn-3-ol35               Methanol10               Toluene 5               Diisopropyl ether 5               N,N--dimethylformamide35               Isopropanol (2-propanol)______________________________________ 
    
     EXAMPLE IV 
     Aspirator Composition 
     
         ______________________________________Formulation DVolume-Percent    Component______________________________________45.5              3-Methyl-1-butyn-3-ol50                Methanol 4.5              Water______________________________________ 
    
     EXAMPLE V 
     Aspirator Composition 
     
         ______________________________________Formulation EVolume-Percent    Component______________________________________22.7              3-Methyl-1-butyn-3-ol75                Methanol 2.3              Water______________________________________ 
    
     EXAMPLE VI 
     In accordance with the procedures of Examples I and II in place of 3-methyl-1-butyn-3-ol, there may be utilized any of the alkynols disclosed in the present specification, together with any of the alkanols similarly disclosed. 
     
                                           TABLE I__________________________________________________________________________Highway Mileage Performance Tests - Alkynol Based Fuel Saving Mixtures                        Total Gallons  Car MileageAdditive                           Tank Car (mi./gal.)Formulation    Method   Car Type   Gals. Fuel                              Additive                                   Miles                                       Additive                                              Control__________________________________________________________________________I A + B  Tank Addit. +             1974 Dodge Swinger                        758   2.01 14,400                                       19    Aspiration  None   Control  1974 Dodge Swinger                        938   0.0  15,000                                       --     16II  A + B  Tank Addit. +             1972 Dodge Coronet    Aspiration  Trips: 1. Tank Addit. +        60   0.160                                   1,250                                       21    Aspiration 2. Tank Addit. +        31   0.082                                     590                                       19    Aspiration 3. Tank Addit. +       152   0.210                                   3,200                                       21    Aspiration 4. Tank Addit. +       100   0.265                                   2,000                                       20    Aspiration 5. Tank Addit. +        13   0.034                                     263                                       20    Aspiration 6. Tank Addit. +        40   0.106                                     848                                       21    Aspiration 7. Tank Addit. only     45   0.119                                     851                                       19             Total      365   0.976                                   7,402                                       Av. 20  None   Control  1972 Dodge Coronet 8. Av. Highway         311   0.0  5,286      17 9. Av. City            309   0.0  4,320      14III  C      Tank Addit.             1973 Ford LTD                         77   0.31 1,028                                       13.4             Station Wagon    Control  1973 Ford LTD                         87   0.0    983      11.3             Station Wagon__________________________________________________________________________ 
    
     Legend for Table I 
     Test I 
     Mainly daily highway driving from East St. Louis to Baldwin, Mo.-60 miles per day and 5 days per week; total mileage 14,400 miles using both the tank-additive (Formulation A) and aspiration (Formulation B) methods described in Example I. Test I was carried out during 1975 using as test vehicle, a 1974 Dodge Swinger. 8 cylinder car, 318 engine (48 h.p.). The amounts of Formulations A and B that were used are the quantities described in Example I. Total consumption of additives and gasoline are summarized in Tables I and II. 
     Test II 
     Comprises 7 separate trips using as test vehicle, a 1972 Dodge Coornet, 8 cylinder, 318 engine (48 h.p.). The tank-additive and aspirator quantities are the same as in Test I. 
     Trip (1) East St. Louis to Columbia, Mo.-250 miles round-trip; total mileage 1250 miles for 5 identical trips (1975-1979). 
     Trip (2) East St. Louis to Chicago, Ill.-590 miles round-trip (1976). 
     Trip (3) East St. Louis to Lynchburg, Va.-1600 miles round-trip; total mileage 3200 miles for two similar trips (1977, 1978). 
     Trip (4) East St. Louis to Fallsburg, N.Y.-2,000 miles round-trip (1978). 
     Trip (5) East St. Louis to Columbia, Mo.-263 miles round-trip (1979). 
     Trip (6) East St. Louis to Washington, D.C.-848 miles one-way (1979). 
     Trip (7) Washington, D.C. to East St. Louis-848 miles one-way (1979); tank-mix additive only used. 
     Test III 
     Local winter driving during 1978-1979 at Whitehouse Station, N.J., using as test vehicle a 1973 Ford LTD Station Wagon, 400 standard engine (460 cu. in); tank additive only used as Formulation C, Example II. 
     
                                           TABLE II__________________________________________________________________________Highway Fuel Economics Based on Table I DataGallons - Fuel or Additive                                   Gal.           Tank               Aspir..sup.(1)                    Total                        Total Mileage                                   Fuel.sup.(2)                                       Ratio Fuel:Test  Formulation        Fuel           Addit.               Addit.                    Addit.                        Car Miles                              (Mi. gal.)                                   Saved                                       Total Addit.__________________________________________________________________________I     A + B  758           2.01                4.35                    6.36                        14,400                              19   143 119I     Control        901           0.0 0.0  0.0 14,400                              16    0   0II.sup.(3) A + B  365           0.98                2.30                    3.28                        7,402 20   70  111(Trips 1-7)II    Control        435           0.0 0.0  0.0 7,402 17    0   0III   Tank Addit.         77           0.31               0.0  0.31                        1,028 13.4 14  248III   Control         91           0.0 0.0  0.0 1,028 11.3  0   0__________________________________________________________________________ .sup.(1) Aspirator formulation usage is 0.528 gallons (2.0 liters) per 1,700 miles highway travel. .sup.(2) Fuel savings is equal to total mileage used with additives (addit.) minus the control; Tests I, II, III. .sup.(3) All trips except (7) used the tank additive + aspirator method ( + B); trip 7 used only tank additive, formulation (C). 
    
     
                                           TABLE III__________________________________________________________________________Highway Mileage Performance Tests - Use of Only Alkynol (M.B.)                  Total Gallons                               Car                  Gals.                      Tank Car Mileage                                    (16 gal. tank)Alkynol Method Car Type                  Fuel                      Additive                           Miles                               (Mi. gal.)                                    Comments__________________________________________________________________________None    Tank Addit.          1984 Ford LTD                  177.8                      0    3,555                               19.99                                    Local + Highway   Only   Wagon                     (Control)Methyl Butynol   Tank Addit.          1984 Ford LTD                  54.2                      0.053                           1,133                               20.90                                    200 ml. M.B./16 gal.(M.B.)  Only   Wagon                     gas. Local + HighwayMethyl Butynol   Tank Addit.          1984 Ford LTD                  42.5                      0.053                           924 21.74                                    200 ml. M.B./16 gal.(M.B.)  Only   Wagon                     gas. Local + HighwayMethyl Butynol   Tank Addit.          1984 Ford LTD                  16.8                      0.106                           397 23.63                                    400 ml. M.B./16 gal.(M.B.)  Only   Wagon                     gas. Local + HighwayMethyl Butynol   Tank Addit.          1984 Ford LTD                  26.9                      0.106                           592 22.00                                    400 ml. M.B./16 gal.(M.B.)  Only   Wagon                     gas. Local + HighwayMethyl Butynol   Tank Addit.          1984 Ford LTD                  41.4                      0.027                           833 20.12                                    100 ml. M.B./16 gal.(M.B.)  Only   Wagon                     gas. Local + Highway__________________________________________________________________________ 
    
     
                                           TABLE IV__________________________________________________________________________Aspirator Only - Highway Mileage PerformanceFormulation__________________________________________________________________________None       Aspirator           1972 Dodge                 36.9                    0.0                       506                          13.71                             Control      Only Coronet           No Methyl Butynol45.5% M.B.; 45%      Aspirator           1972 Dodge                 31.4                    0.115                       506                          16.11                             MB. --CH.sub.3 OH--H.sub.2 OH.sub.2 O; 50% Methanol      Only Coronet           Mixture22.7% M.B.; 2.3%      Aspirator           1972 Dodge                 32.4                    0.115                       506                          14.21                             MB. --CH.sub.3 OH--H.sub.2 OH.sub.2 O; 75.0% Methanol      Only Coronet           Mixture__________________________________________________________________________ Asspirator Test: 1972 Dodge Coronet; Round Trips St. to Kansas City, 506 miles.

Technology Category: 2