Primarygun Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 My note said that heat, oxidant and fuel are essential for a fire to occur. Is it possible for a fire to happen without the presence of oxygen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrisch Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 I didn't think so... But the "oxidant" refers to that, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 absolutely. an oxidant? how about, say, a halogen? and a fuel? how about, say, an alkali metal or alkane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 absolutely. an oxidant? how about, say, a halogen? and a fuel? how about, say, an alkali metal or alkane? As budullewraagh sad it can happen quite easily. I know Iron wool can burn in a Chlorine atmosphere because I have done so! (Looks great too - lots of sparks ) I didn't think so... But the "oxidant" refers to that' date=' doesn't it? [/quote'] Just remember the OIL RIG rule, (Oxidation Is Loss of electrons, Reduction Is Gain). It was named Oxidation ebcause it was originally thougt to only happen when Oxygen was present but later the definition was expande but the name remained the same! Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primarygun Posted October 16, 2005 Author Share Posted October 16, 2005 I couldn't imagine a strong oxidizing agent other than oxygen can cause fire. Can anyone give an example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 I couldn't imagine a strong oxidizing agent other than oxygen can cause fire.Can anyone give an example? I can't think of an example off hand but if there were a strong exothermic reaction then it could start a fire I suppose Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primarygun Posted October 16, 2005 Author Share Posted October 16, 2005 start a fire It's supposed that the fire triangle does indicate that the raw materials responsible for a fire rather than just starting it, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 It's supposed that the fire triangle does indicate that the raw materials responsible for a fire rather than just starting it, right? Do you mean its the actual source or the fule for the combution? If you do then yes You'd be hard pressed to have a coal fire without the coal Just to add: Iron wool will also burn in all of the Group VII elements in gas form as far as I can tell. (tested with Chlorine, Bromine and Iodine - can't get any Fluorine!) Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 it's ok. fluorine will burn just about anything:\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 it's ok. fluorine will burn just about anything:\ I'm not surprised... in a book I have its explaining about the incompatabilities of certain chemicals with one and other... the listing for Fluorine is everything... Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woelen Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 it's ok. fluorine will burn just about anything:\ Yes, I understood that water can burn in fluorine! That would be really cool to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Yes, I understood that water can burn in fluorine! That would be really cool to see. Yea it could but its probably not something I'd like to try in a home lab (I would not really like a load of Fluorine gas stored, knowing what this stuff can do)... I must say it sounds strange burning water because people normally accociate burning with flames and not the movement of electrons I'll have to try this one day though Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 tHE FACT IS THAT THE FOLLOWING ARE REQUIRED FOR COMBUSTION TO OCCUR 1)cOMBUSTIBLE SUBSTANCE EG.HYDROGEN, 2)SUPPORTER OF combustion rg.chlorine,oxygen 3)Ignition temperature The supporter of combustion is generally called the oxidant Not necessarily reffering to oxygen but to any supporter or oxidising agent.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanjaygeorge Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 The most common in the nature is oxygen that why it's given so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 The most common in the nature is oxygen that why it's given so. Actually it was given that name because, at the time of its naming, they presumed that things could only burn (Become oxadized) in Oxygen, it was later foudn out that things can be Oxadized by other substances and thus the definiton was expanded to the movement of electrons but the name stuck Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now