Talk:Combustion
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Combustion article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 300 days ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Categories:
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 300 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Factual error
[edit]This was a dispute over the inclusion of N2 in the equation of complete combustion since it doesn't react. It was decided it should be kept since it affects the temperature and does react to make minor species. Full details are in the Combustion Archive.
Improvements needed
[edit]This was a dispute that spawned from confusion over different terminology meaning the same thing, particular adiabatic combustion temperature with adiabatic flame temperature and heat of combustion with heating value. It was decided that a more conscious effort should be made to include multiple terminology but to also to point the terms are equivalent. Full details are in the Combustion Archive.
Away from the basics
[edit]Does anyone understand what characteristic of oxygen makes combustion happen? What is it about reactions with that specific element that makes fire? How does that attribute work which makes it different from any other reaction that is not combustion? I'd appreciate any input. Thank you.
Typo regarding Nitrogen
[edit]In the "Complete vs. incomplete" section:
"Nitrogen does not take part in combustion, but at high temperatures, some nitrogen will be converted to NOx, usually between 1% and 0.002% (2 ppm)."
One of those figures (0.002% and 2 ppm) has to be wrong, because...
0.002% would be 20 ppm.
0.0002% would be 2 ppm.
I would change it myself but I don't know which figure is the correct one, and having no luck searching online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikecurse (talk • contribs) 18:29, 26 October 2010
yeah, i agree with this, i'd assume 0.002% is right, however, i will do more research before i seeks to correct it
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Physical sciences
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Physical sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Physical sciences
- C-Class Chemistry articles
- High-importance Chemistry articles
- WikiProject Chemistry articles
- C-Class physics articles
- High-importance physics articles
- C-Class physics articles of High-importance
- C-Class Materials articles
- High-importance Materials articles
- WikiProject Materials articles