Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
the less nonsense) it made.
Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
(http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
hooked up and running.
But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
- Joe
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:56:33 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
>> We also had a big Chesapeake Retriever who would 'shake' _on_command_ --
>> no, not 'shake hands', though he did that too, but after a bath. We would
>> tell him 'stand still', tent a big towel over him, and say 'Okay, _now_
>> shake', whereupon he would. Was also _real_ handy when bringing him in
>> from outside when it was raining or snowing.
>
>Probably a big surprise for those who can't resist giving orders to somebody
>else's dog too.
Hehe! Hate em. Had one the other day. As soon as he saw the dog he
commented that she was "Juuust not overweight" (she's not overweight),
and then told her to sit (which the bugger did much faster for him
than for me, but hey, it was probably surprise) for no reason at all.
Then he said "shake, and held his hand down to her paw. I said "She
doesn't shake" ......and he just held his hand there. It felt good to
see her just Sit, as ordered and look at him! <G>.
I reckon they are just one step form the guys who can't help hitting
on everyone's partner. It's a power thing.
I can understand why you get the average retriever to learn to shake
water on command! However, all my dogs have learned that one. As was
said it's very useful.
*****************************************************
It's not the milk and honey we hate. It's having it
rammed down our throats.
In article <[email protected]>,
J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
>Mark Hopkins wrote:
>
>> Have you ever tried to bathe a cat?
>
>Flashed on a friend who loved cats and loved his wife, who was allergic to
>cat dander. Solution--remove the dander. So once a week he bathed six
>cats. Surprisingly, the cats got to where they liked their bath, would
>line up to be bathed, and became petulant if he didn't bathe them on time.
>
When I was growing up, our cat felt the need to supervise people baths.
Sitting right on the edge of the tub. With his tail dangling _into_ the
water.
I don't recall ever finding out his opinion of a -cat- bath. But he did
like to be _vacuumed_. Directly by the hose of a regular canister vacuum.
We also had a big Chesapeake Retriever who would 'shake' _on_command_ --
no, not 'shake hands', though he did that too, but after a bath. We would
tell him 'stand still', tent a big towel over him, and say 'Okay, _now_
shake', whereupon he would. Was also _real_ handy when bringing him in from
outside when it was raining or snowing.
[email protected] (Joe Emenaker) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
> me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
> hooked up and running.
IMHO, you shouldn't cut ferrous metals on woodworking machines. Brass
or aluminium maybe, if you have nothing better, but steel swarf is
hard to clean up and can cause a lot of wear and damage. It's also
filthy stuff for things like "iron stain" on oak.
> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> water in it?
Bad idea IMHO. If you have a steel cyclone, you're asking for
corrosion problems - especially if you then fill it with greenish oak
dust, or something equally acidic. It wouldn't even work - the sawdust
will soak up any free water, so you'd have to be adding gallons of it
to have any effect.
I'd just empty the DC collector before throwing sparks into it.
On 22 Jul 2004 17:09:17 -0700, Joe Emenaker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks.
...until the sawdust and woodchips wicked it all up.
> So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
> Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
I used to have an old Allis Chalmers tractor that had a glass jar
as part of the air filtering mechanism, maybe was supposed to be
filled with (what?) to catch things going by, but I think the water
would rapidly turn into slightly moist sawdust and a hard cake.
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 22:02:48 -0700, Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 23 Jul 2004 00:16:19 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I used to have an old Allis Chalmers tractor that had a glass jar
>>as part of the air filtering mechanism, maybe was supposed to be
>>filled with (what?) to catch things going by, but I think the water
>>would rapidly turn into slightly moist sawdust and a hard cake.
>
> On your tractor, that glass jar was supposed to be filled with ....
> air.
Oh good, because that's what I always kept in there.
> The use of glass jars as dust traps was a simple, easily replaceable
> mechanism for filtering air prior to the engine intake. It may also have
> had an adjunct oil-bath air cleaner that used oil to further trap
> particles.
It did, indeed, have an oil-bath air cleaner. Nice little old tractor, but
that magneto was a perpetual problem. It has gone to a better place now,
though. (No, really, a friend who collects 'em bought it for parts to
restore another of the same type).
Dave
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:32:19 -0500, Robert Galloway <[email protected]> wrote:
> Do you have any record of spontaneous combustion coming about from dried
> wood, subsequently rendered wet as he describes? Don't think it happens.
What, spontaneous combustion in moist wood-like substances, or from
someone specifically in this situation you mean?
It's certainly not much different from any other wet hay-like situation.
And I have stuck my hands into a pile of fresh sawdust to find it was
warm inside.
Dave Hinz
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:51:57 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> I note the word "fresh" in your answer. Now read the question.
I would, my top-posting friend, but you've quoted in such a way to
make it inconvenient. Also, whatever your point may be is masked by
your apparent attitude, so I can't see much point. Maybe you're saying
that moist sawdust is different somehow from moist sawdust?
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:12:07 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> Are you bottom-posting because your brains are there?
No, I'm posting in the order that conversations take place in, so as
not to (ahem) come accross as an arrogant person whose pronouncements
shalt be the last word.
> As I said before, it is volatile organics produced by _GREEN_ hay or manure,
> or sawdust which ignite.
You seem to be equating my "fresh sawdust" with "green hay or manure" now,
which is most decidedly not what I had written.
> It is a chemical reaction, and those chemicals are no longer present in hay
> properly crimped and dried, or as the question to which you allegedly
> replied, previously dried wood shavings.
So, the pile of sawdust I stuck my hands into wasn't really warm then?
Odd, sure felt like it.
> You're sitting in front of a reference library, why not look up the real
> answer instead of displaying your ignorance and then trying to defend it
> with ad hominem bullshit (which ignites less readily than horse, because
> cattle are more efficient in their digestion).
> http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/livestock/dairy/facts/hayfires.htm
Yes, I'm familiar with wet hay fires. Are you going on record as saying
damp sawdust cannot spontaneously combust? How sure are you of this?
Showing that hay combusts for reason (A), and showing that sawdust does
not have reason (A), does not mean sawdust does not spontaneously combust,
it just means it doesn't spontaneously combust _for that precise
reason_. Yes?
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 06:43:07 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> Yep, on record as saying that, absent the volatile organics which are the
> source of the ignition, you have wet sawdust, which won't burn on its own or
> with a flame until the water is expelled. Fresh sawdust and fresh hay
> outgas the same.
So your statement, without weasel-words built in as you have done, is
"Sawdust from a woodworking shop cannot spontaneously combust", yes or no?
> The wonderful thing about science is that there is a cause - effect,
> reproducible outcome.
And yet, there are people who don't understand it, and will expand one
situation to an unlrelated situation.
> You find yourself approached to serve on many product liability juries?
> Seems you're what the ambulance chasers would like.
That's kind of amusing to read, since I'm the one in the back of the
ambulance, working on the patient.
Draw a venn diagram of your sawdust/manure/fire theory, and you can show
yourself where the flaw in your logic is.
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:06:20 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> It's not me you should agree with, it's reality.
>
> Find another source of ignition anywhere but in your imagination? Please
> let us know.
Oily rags are not fresh manure or wet hay, and yet they can spontaneously
combust.
> The water of precise knowledge is in front of you. Drink.
Oh, the irony.
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:37:55 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> Yeah, me too. So how is it you have such contempt for precise knowledge?
Yeah, me too, WHAT? WTF are you responding to, George? You don't
even see with this blatant example, why your insistance on top-posting
inhibits communication?
I have no contempt for precise knowledge. Why don't you try exhibiting
some and we'll see if you can.
> Not theory, but fact. Once again, that's what science is - reproducible,
> and everywhere the same.
>> Draw a venn diagram of your sawdust/manure/fire theory, and you can show
>> yourself where the flaw in your logic is.
I notice you ignored this. Do you have _any_ point to make here,
George, or are you just making noise to listen to yourself?
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:25:39 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> Venn diagrams are meaningless in cause-effect relationships.
Good lord. You must be being _intentionally_ dense.
Of the set of all objects which are causes for spontaneous combustion,
some of them apply to manure. Some of them apply to hay. Some of
them apply to oily rags, and so on. Oily rags are not cow manure.
Sawdust is not oily rags. Wet hay is neither.
> "Communication" with the unreasoning is impossible.
I've noticed that.
> I would expect someone else with a medic's card to have some scientific
> background, and respect for learning. In your case, I'm wrong.
I have plenty of respect for science, communication, and learning. You
continue not to exhibit any of those.
Third time: (I bet you'll evade it again)
Are you saying that spontaneous combustion of sawdust is impossible?
Hi Dave,
You are right about ending up with sawdust cake. I tried it in a plastic
receiver as an attempt to knock down the small dust particles as they
impinged on the surface. It works but the rapid passage of high volumes
of air caused the water to evaporate very quickly. Very moist air going
through the blower et al is not going to do it much good either. Cheers,
JG
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On 22 Jul 2004 17:09:17 -0700, Joe Emenaker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> > water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks.
>
> ...until the sawdust and woodchips wicked it all up.
>
> > So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
> > Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
> I used to have an old Allis Chalmers tractor that had a glass jar
> as part of the air filtering mechanism, maybe was supposed to be
> filled with (what?) to catch things going by, but I think the water
> would rapidly turn into slightly moist sawdust and a hard cake.
I've "tried" it. Sort of. Put a dehumidifier in the workshop and forgot to
turn it off while working. You know, they make paper out of wood fibers,
and that's what I had in the wet cooling vanes and in and on the collection
bucket.
The kind they make to catch lint from the dryer doesn't work that well,
either.
"Joe Emenaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
> that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
> help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
> out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
> hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>
Joe,
I do a fair amount of cutting and welding in my dual purpose shop. I put
the DC in primarily to keep sawdust from building up and becoming a fire
danger when I weld, grind or cut.
I never use the DC when working with metals. This can have very devastating
results, fire being the greatest danger. A hot piece may smolder in the
sawdust for a few minutes or even hours, then combust when you are sleeping!
The steel swarf, if left un-attended too, will rust the cast iron tables. It
is a pain, but when switching between wood and iron work, a good cleaning is
required.
I just finished a project that involved both trades. Pictures are in ABPW -
A very secure cabinet.
Dave
"Joe Emenaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
> idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
> the less nonsense) it made.
>
> Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
> (http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
> was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
> a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
> dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
> accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>
> Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
> me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
> hooked up and running.
>
> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
> that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
> help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
> out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
> hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>
> So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
> Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
> - Joe
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Joe Emenaker wrote:
>
> > Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
> > idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
> > the less nonsense) it made.
> >
> > Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
> > (http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
> > was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
> > a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
> > dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
> > accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
> >
> > Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
> > me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
> > hooked up and running.
> >
> > But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> > water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
> > that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
> > help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
> > out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
> > hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
> >
> > So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
> > Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
> Now you end up with damp wood with an oxygen source. Can you say
> "spontaneous combustion"?
--------Or a great source of MOULDS.
> >
> > - Joe
>
> --
> --John
> Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Do you have any record of spontaneous combustion coming about from dried
wood, subsequently rendered wet as he describes? Don't think it happens.
rhg
J. Clarke wrote:
> Joe Emenaker wrote:
>
>
>>Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
>>idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
>>the less nonsense) it made.
>>
>>Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
>>(http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
>>was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
>>a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
>>dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
>>accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>>
>>Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
>>me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
>>hooked up and running.
>>
>>But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
>>water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
>>that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
>>help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
>>out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
>>hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>>
>>So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
>>Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
>
> Now you end up with damp wood with an oxygen source. Can you say
> "spontaneous combustion"?
>
>>- Joe
>
>
J. is not a scientist, but a believer.
You are correct in assuming that it is the oxidation of volatile
organics -exothermic reaction - in confinement which causes ignition. They
are not normally found in seasoned wood.
"Robert Galloway" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Do you have any record of spontaneous combustion coming about from dried
> wood, subsequently rendered wet as he describes? Don't think it happens.
>
> rhg
>
>
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Now you end up with damp wood with an oxygen source. Can you say
> > "spontaneous combustion"?
I note the word "fresh" in your answer. Now read the question.
"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:32:19 -0500, Robert Galloway
<[email protected]> wrote:
> > Do you have any record of spontaneous combustion coming about from dried
> > wood, subsequently rendered wet as he describes? Don't think it
happens.
>
> What, spontaneous combustion in moist wood-like substances, or from
> someone specifically in this situation you mean?
>
> It's certainly not much different from any other wet hay-like situation.
> And I have stuck my hands into a pile of fresh sawdust to find it was
> warm inside.
>
> Dave Hinz
>
Are you bottom-posting because your brains are there?
As I said before, it is volatile organics produced by _GREEN_ hay or manure,
or sawdust which ignite.
It is a chemical reaction, and those chemicals are no longer present in hay
properly crimped and dried, or as the question to which you allegedly
replied, previously dried wood shavings.
You're sitting in front of a reference library, why not look up the real
answer instead of displaying your ignorance and then trying to defend it
with ad hominem bullshit (which ignites less readily than horse, because
cattle are more efficient in their digestion).
http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/livestock/dairy/facts/hayfires.htm
And any number of places.
"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:51:57 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> > I note the word "fresh" in your answer. Now read the question.
>
> I would, my top-posting friend, but you've quoted in such a way to
> make it inconvenient. Also, whatever your point may be is masked by
> your apparent attitude, so I can't see much point. Maybe you're saying
> that moist sawdust is different somehow from moist sawdust?
>
I'm going to have to go with Dave on this, growing up my dad was the fire
chief in a rural town in eastern ID, my grandfather was the fire chief in
Rexburg( 3 miles away), according to them you should NEVER leave wet
Organic material, hey, sawdust, grass clipping, etc. where they can't dry,
they'll begin to rot which makes heat, then they start to smolder, and as
soon as there exposed to air (like dumping the container) they'll burst
into flames, ever wonder why the trash company doesn't want to take yard
clipping?
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:12:07 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
>> Are you bottom-posting because your brains are there?
>
> No, I'm posting in the order that conversations take place in, so as
> not to (ahem) come accross as an arrogant person whose pronouncements
> shalt be the last word.
>
>> As I said before, it is volatile organics produced by _GREEN_ hay or
>> manure, or sawdust which ignite.
>
> You seem to be equating my "fresh sawdust" with "green hay or manure" now,
> which is most decidedly not what I had written.
>
>> It is a chemical reaction, and those chemicals are no longer present in
>> hay properly crimped and dried, or as the question to which you allegedly
>> replied, previously dried wood shavings.
>
> So, the pile of sawdust I stuck my hands into wasn't really warm then?
> Odd, sure felt like it.
>
>> You're sitting in front of a reference library, why not look up the real
>> answer instead of displaying your ignorance and then trying to defend it
>> with ad hominem bullshit (which ignites less readily than horse, because
>> cattle are more efficient in their digestion).
>
>> http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/livestock/dairy/facts/hayfires.htm
>
> Yes, I'm familiar with wet hay fires. Are you going on record as saying
> damp sawdust cannot spontaneously combust? How sure are you of this?
> Showing that hay combusts for reason (A), and showing that sawdust does
> not have reason (A), does not mean sawdust does not spontaneously combust,
> it just means it doesn't spontaneously combust _for that precise
> reason_. Yes?
Did you do any search at all, or read the material I referenced?
Did you catch the significance of the CRITICAL temperature? 100 C / 212 F
is the boiling point of water, which, up until that temperature is reached,
has been cooling the mass by evaporation, preventing ignition. You see, wet
hay, even when green, has to dry out before it can combust.
As I look out to the north I see round bales stretching across the next 40.
All have great bulk to provide insulation, all are undeniably wet, and none
are flaming, because the volatile organics which cause spontaneous ignition
are not there.
Oh yes, you put out a hay fire with water.
"Richard Clements" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm going to have to go with Dave on this, growing up my dad was the fire
> chief in a rural town in eastern ID, my grandfather was the fire chief in
> Rexburg( 3 miles away), according to them you should NEVER leave wet
> Organic material, hey, sawdust, grass clipping, etc. where they can't dry,
> they'll begin to rot which makes heat, then they start to smolder, and as
> soon as there exposed to air (like dumping the container) they'll burst
> into flames, ever wonder why the trash company doesn't want to take yard
> clipping?
>
Yep, on record as saying that, absent the volatile organics which are the
source of the ignition, you have wet sawdust, which won't burn on its own or
with a flame until the water is expelled. Fresh sawdust and fresh hay
outgas the same.
The wonderful thing about science is that there is a cause - effect,
reproducible outcome.
You find yourself approached to serve on many product liability juries?
Seems you're what the ambulance chasers would like.
"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:12:07 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> > As I said before, it is volatile organics produced by _GREEN_ hay or
manure,
> > or sawdust which ignite.
>
> You seem to be equating my "fresh sawdust" with "green hay or manure" now,
> which is most decidedly not what I had written.
>
>
> > http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/livestock/dairy/facts/hayfires.htm
>
> Yes, I'm familiar with wet hay fires. Are you going on record as saying
> damp sawdust cannot spontaneously combust? How sure are you of this?
> Showing that hay combusts for reason (A), and showing that sawdust does
> not have reason (A), does not mean sawdust does not spontaneously combust,
> it just means it doesn't spontaneously combust _for that precise
> reason_. Yes?
>
>
It's not me you should agree with, it's reality.
Find another source of ignition anywhere but in your imagination? Please
let us know.
The water of precise knowledge is in front of you. Drink.
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> If science knew everything then the scientists would be out of a job.
> Remember that.
>
By the same mechanism, if you had the sense to search!
"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:06:20 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> > It's not me you should agree with, it's reality.
> >
> > Find another source of ignition anywhere but in your imagination?
Please
> > let us know.
>
> Oily rags are not fresh manure or wet hay, and yet they can spontaneously
> combust.
>
> > The water of precise knowledge is in front of you. Drink.
>
> Oh, the irony.
>
Yeah, me too. So how is it you have such contempt for precise knowledge?
Not theory, but fact. Once again, that's what science is - reproducible,
and everywhere the same.
"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > You find yourself approached to serve on many product liability juries?
> > Seems you're what the ambulance chasers would like.
>
> That's kind of amusing to read, since I'm the one in the back of the
> ambulance, working on the patient.
>
> Draw a venn diagram of your sawdust/manure/fire theory, and you can show
> yourself where the flaw in your logic is.
>
Venn diagrams are meaningless in cause-effect relationships.
"Communication" with the unreasoning is impossible.
I would expect someone else with a medic's card to have some scientific
background, and respect for learning. In your case, I'm wrong.
"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:37:55 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
> > Yeah, me too. So how is it you have such contempt for precise
knowledge?
>
> Yeah, me too, WHAT? WTF are you responding to, George? You don't
> even see with this blatant example, why your insistance on top-posting
> inhibits communication?
>
Do you have any record of spontaneous combustion coming about from dried
wood, subsequently rendered wet as he describes? Don't think it happens.
rhg
J. Clarke wrote:
> Joe Emenaker wrote:
>
>
>>Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
>>idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
>>the less nonsense) it made.
>>
>>Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
>>(http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
>>was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
>>a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
>>dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
>>accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>>
>>Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
>>me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
>>hooked up and running.
>>
>>But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
>>water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
>>that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
>>help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
>>out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
>>hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>>
>>So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
>>Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
>
> Now you end up with damp wood with an oxygen source. Can you say
> "spontaneous combustion"?
>
>>- Joe
>
>
In article <[email protected]>,
J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
>Old Nick wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:56:33 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> <[email protected]> vaguely proposed a theory
>> ......and in reply I say!:
>>
>> remove ns from my header address to reply via email
>>
>>
>>>> We also had a big Chesapeake Retriever who would 'shake' _on_command_ --
>>>> no, not 'shake hands', though he did that too, but after a bath. We
>>>> would tell him 'stand still', tent a big towel over him, and say 'Okay,
>>>> _now_
>>>> shake', whereupon he would. Was also _real_ handy when bringing him in
>>>> from outside when it was raining or snowing.
>>>
>>>Probably a big surprise for those who can't resist giving orders to
>>>somebody else's dog too.
>>
>> Hehe! Hate em. Had one the other day. As soon as he saw the dog he
>> commented that she was "Juuust not overweight" (she's not overweight),
>> and then told her to sit (which the bugger did much faster for him
>> than for me, but hey, it was probably surprise) for no reason at all.
>> Then he said "shake, and held his hand down to her paw. I said "She
>> doesn't shake" ......and he just held his hand there. It felt good to
>> see her just Sit, as ordered and look at him! <G>.
>>
>> I reckon they are just one step form the guys who can't help hitting
>> on everyone's partner. It's a power thing.
>>
>> I can understand why you get the average retriever to learn to shake
>> water on command! However, all my dogs have learned that one. As was
>> said it's very useful.
>
>My favorite in that regard was the mutt (i.e. of no identifiable breed--the
>closest one could narrow it down to was that it wasn't a cat)
Ah. _That_ breed is often described as a 'purebred Heinz'
Then there was the time a guy took one of those critters into a bar where
a bunch of dog fanciers were holding session. Who immediately start ridiculing
the new arrival. Eventually, one of the guys asks the newcomer "Just _what_
kind of a dog *is* that, anyway?" The reply: "he's a Mexican Spitz." Which
sets the crowd off, again. Somebody deigns to explain "There ain't any such
animal." Whereupon the dog looks up, and says "Señor? Ptui!"
> that learned
>a command that sounded an awful lot like "sit". He didn't know or do "sit"
>but sometimes if someone told him to "sit" he'd do the command that he did
>know.
>
Mistakes _can_ happen, when you let somebody with a sever lisp try to teach
him to expectorate on command. *grin*
In article <[email protected]>,
J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>Mark Hopkins wrote:
>>>
>>>> Have you ever tried to bathe a cat?
>>>
>>>Flashed on a friend who loved cats and loved his wife, who was allergic to
>>>cat dander. Solution--remove the dander. So once a week he bathed six
>>>cats. Surprisingly, the cats got to where they liked their bath, would
>>>line up to be bathed, and became petulant if he didn't bathe them on time.
>>>
>>
>> When I was growing up, our cat felt the need to supervise people baths.
>> Sitting right on the edge of the tub. With his tail dangling _into_ the
>> water.
>>
>> I don't recall ever finding out his opinion of a -cat- bath. But he did
>> like to be _vacuumed_. Directly by the hose of a regular canister vacuum.
>
>Never encountered a cat that wouldn't run in terror from a vacuum. OTOH,
>the neighbor's cat used to like to come over and get swept with a broom.
What can I say. The cat was practically bigger than the vacuum was. <grin>
Anyway, he'd just lay down on his side, and when one side was done, he'd
roll over.
I don't remember how he got _introduced_ to it, but this was an _old_
green Eureka canister. It was extremely quiet, despite having a lot of
pulling power. Did a _great_ job of pulling out the old winter under-coat,
come spring time.
I gotta tell ya, vacuuming the livestock is a whole *lot* more efficient
than having to vacuum all the furniture, rugs, etc. to pick up shed hairs.
>> We also had a big Chesapeake Retriever who would 'shake' _on_command_ --
>> no, not 'shake hands', though he did that too, but after a bath. We would
>> tell him 'stand still', tent a big towel over him, and say 'Okay, _now_
>> shake', whereupon he would. Was also _real_ handy when bringing him in
>> from outside when it was raining or snowing.
>
>Probably a big surprise for those who can't resist giving orders to somebody
>else's dog too.
Chesapeake's are *smart* -- _ANNOYINGLY_ smart. However, in this case, he
knew the difference between 'sit' / 'shake', and 'stand still' / 'now shake'.
Heck, for 'shake' (hands), if you put out your left hand, he'd use his left
paw, and if you put out your right hand, he'd use his right paw. And if you
then said 'the other one' he'd drop whichever paw he had up, and offer 'the
other one'.
The 'stand still... OK, now shake' DID impress the hell out of any visitors
who happened to see it -- almost invariably the reaction was "I wouldn't
have believed it, if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes!"
[email protected] (Joe Emenaker) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
> idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
> the less nonsense) it made.
>
> Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
> (http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
> was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
> a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
> dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
> accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>
> Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
> me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
> hooked up and running.
>
> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
> that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
> help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
> out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
> hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>
> So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
> Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
> - Joe
It's amazing,
..like whispering a word around a circle, when we were
kids, and finding it returned indistinguishable from its beginning.
This may be a bit hasty, but, I am concluding from my experience
reading both the Cruising World Sailing Board and Woodworking Rec, any
thread greater than 7 entrees is bound to be off topic by the 8th. I
can imagine, though, with some concentrated imagination, how some were
able morph DC into Dogs and Cats.
Regards,
Richard
Have you ever tried to bathe a cat?
"Joe Emenaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
> idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
> the less nonsense) it made.
>
> Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
> (http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
> was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
> a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
> dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
> accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>
> Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
> me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
> hooked up and running.
>
> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
> that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
> help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
> out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
> hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>
> So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
> Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
> - Joe
George wrote:
> Yep, on record as saying that, absent the volatile organics which are the
> source of the ignition, you have wet sawdust, which won't burn on its own or
> with a flame until the water is expelled. Fresh sawdust and fresh hay
> outgas the same.
That's quite a brash statement (that they outgas the same). But I like
the way you make brash (or ambiguous) statements and then mock everyone
who disagrees. It makes the internet worth while.
Anyway, to the matter at hand...a cursory search of the internet, which
as we know never provides false information, shows many examples of
spontaneously combusting sawdust, albeit usually at the bottom of a 20'
mound. I did, however, find an example of a fire caused by a "pile of
sawdust under a sawbench." How big a pile? I dunno'. See:
<http://www.news-mail.com.au/news/0603/280603_2.html>
Likely, the dust was from green wood.
-----
Now, because of the nature of the danger, this problem has actually been
studied (believe it or not, we need not concern ourselves with hay
fires!). The following absolute truth was also found on the internet:
From <http://www.ciwm.co.uk/mediastore/FILES/10867.pdf>:
"As with compost and rubber tyres, wood chips and sawdust material can
undergo self-heating reactions, leading to spontaneous combustion, under
certain storage conditions. Factors that will play a part in whether
self-heating leading to combustion will occur are the size of the wood
chips, the moisture content, the presence of other flammable waste
materials within the stockpile that are easily ignitable, and the
natural oil content of the wood. Sawdust has been tested extensively[1]
over any years and it has been found that the greater the proportion of
oil present in the wood, the lower the critical ignition temperature
(the temperature at which a runaway reaction occurs)."
1. Bowes, P C. Self-heating: evaluating and controlling the hazards.
Building Research Establishment. Department of the Environment. 1984. HMSO.
It seems this Bowes fella' made a career out of this stuff. Even though
he died in 2001, he was nice enough to write it all down in a book.
Sadly, now that I'm no longer a student, I can't get my hands on it
easily. But maybe if one of you could find it, it could settle the
matter of whether or not s.c. is possible in this case. It might also
answer the more immediate question of who can piss farther.
In the above, I note the following:
1) Oil content is critical. How much oil is in sawdust from green wood
vs. dust from air dried vs. kilned, I don't know. Anyone?
2) Note that several other factors, including other oil sources are
important. This certainly has bearing on the original poster's question.
Does, for example, it make a difference if he cuts plywood or any
other source of organics? What if he hacks up an old project that was
treated with linseed oil?
I suspect that if one read the book, you'd be hard pressed to make a
case for s.c. at this small a scale (especially since the water content
must be just right); nevertheless, I bet you _could_ come up with a
scenario, albeit unlikely. Would I worry about it? No. But I'm not silly
enough to put water in my DC system...
-----
As for hay, I found this incontrovertible evidence (of course, because
it's on the internet):
From <http://www.cdc.gov/nasd/docs/d000701-d000800/d000758/d000758.pdf>
"Hay fires usually occur within six weeks of baling, but they may occur
in hay several years old. Fire can occur in loose hay, small bales,
large bales or in stacks. The fires can occur in hay stored inside as
well as in hay stored outside. Regardless of when or where the fires
occur, the most common cause is excessive moisture."
Note that "old" hay is also subject to s.c., the point being that once
dried, s.c. is rare because, well, it's dry. But if re-wetted, I see no
reason why bacterial growth can't restart. Of course the C:N ratio of
wood is so high that it's hard to get a lot of bacterial growth and heat
production, but that obviously happened in the s.c. examples above. I
have certainly felt warmth in sawdust piles, but they were outside where
heat/organics couldn't build up enough for s.c.
Anyway, the point is that if you want to claim that hay and sawdust
outgas the same, then if old hay can s.c., then surely you agree that
old sawdust can, too. Yes?
> The wonderful thing about science is that there is a cause - effect,
> reproducible outcome.
Well, of course there is. But if we don't understand _all_ of the
factors involved, then changing the input (cause) may lead to an
unexpected result (effect). That is why scientists have jobs -- because
not everything is understood.
Enjoy,
Greg
Richard Clements <[email protected]> writes:
>I'm going to have to go with Dave on this, growing up my dad was the fire
>chief in a rural town in eastern ID, my grandfather was the fire chief in
>Rexburg( 3 miles away), according to them you should NEVER leave wet
>Organic material, hey, sawdust, grass clipping, etc. where they can't dry,
Does that mean I can't put them in a closed compost bin then? They surely
won't dry there (but they will get pretty warm).
>they'll begin to rot which makes heat, then they start to smolder, and as
>soon as there exposed to air (like dumping the container) they'll burst
>into flames, ever wonder why the trash company doesn't want to take yard
>clipping?
My trash company takes yard waste. One can either rent a bin
from the City or pile the stuff in the street for pickup.
scott
(However, I just emptied the DC into the compost pile last weekend, and
within a couple of hours, the chips (on the top of the pile) were at well
over 110 degree F - Now, mind you, I was jointing and planing both green
2x6's and KD studs, so there was definitely green wood in the pile).
On 23 Jul 2004 00:16:19 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 22 Jul 2004 17:09:17 -0700, Joe Emenaker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
>> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks.
>
>...until the sawdust and woodchips wicked it all up.
>
>> So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
>> Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>
>I used to have an old Allis Chalmers tractor that had a glass jar
>as part of the air filtering mechanism, maybe was supposed to be
>filled with (what?) to catch things going by, but I think the water
>would rapidly turn into slightly moist sawdust and a hard cake.
>
On your tractor, that glass jar was supposed to be filled with ....
air. The use of glass jars as dust traps was a simple, easily replaceable
mechanism for filtering air prior to the engine intake. It may also have
had an adjunct oil-bath air cleaner that used oil to further trap
particles.
Joe Emenaker wrote:
> Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
> idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
> the less nonsense) it made.
>
> Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
> (http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
> was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
> a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
> dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
> accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>
> Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
> me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
> hooked up and running.
>
> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
> that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
> help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
> out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
> hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>
> So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
> Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
Now you end up with damp wood with an oxygen source. Can you say
"spontaneous combustion"?
>
> - Joe
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Mark Hopkins wrote:
> Have you ever tried to bathe a cat?
Flashed on a friend who loved cats and loved his wife, who was allergic to
cat dander. Solution--remove the dander. So once a week he bathed six
cats. Surprisingly, the cats got to where they liked their bath, would
line up to be bathed, and became petulant if he didn't bathe them on time.
> "Joe Emenaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
>> idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
>> the less nonsense) it made.
>>
>> Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
>> (http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
>> was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
>> a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
>> dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
>> accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>>
>> Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
>> me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
>> hooked up and running.
>>
>> But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
>> water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
>> that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
>> help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
>> out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
>> hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>>
>> So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
>> Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>>
>> - Joe
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Mark Hopkins wrote:
>>
>>> Have you ever tried to bathe a cat?
>>
>>Flashed on a friend who loved cats and loved his wife, who was allergic to
>>cat dander. Solution--remove the dander. So once a week he bathed six
>>cats. Surprisingly, the cats got to where they liked their bath, would
>>line up to be bathed, and became petulant if he didn't bathe them on time.
>>
>
> When I was growing up, our cat felt the need to supervise people baths.
> Sitting right on the edge of the tub. With his tail dangling _into_ the
> water.
>
> I don't recall ever finding out his opinion of a -cat- bath. But he did
> like to be _vacuumed_. Directly by the hose of a regular canister vacuum.
Never encountered a cat that wouldn't run in terror from a vacuum. OTOH,
the neighbor's cat used to like to come over and get swept with a broom.
> We also had a big Chesapeake Retriever who would 'shake' _on_command_ --
> no, not 'shake hands', though he did that too, but after a bath. We would
> tell him 'stand still', tent a big towel over him, and say 'Okay, _now_
> shake', whereupon he would. Was also _real_ handy when bringing him in
> from outside when it was raining or snowing.
Probably a big surprise for those who can't resist giving orders to somebody
else's dog too.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
"Robert Bonomi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Robert Bonomi wrote:
> >
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>Mark Hopkins wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Have you ever tried to bathe a cat?
> >>>
> >>>Flashed on a friend who loved cats and loved his wife, who was allergic
to
> >>>cat dander. Solution--remove the dander. So once a week he bathed six
> >>>cats. Surprisingly, the cats got to where they liked their bath, would
> >>>line up to be bathed, and became petulant if he didn't bathe them on
time.
> >>>
> >>
> >> When I was growing up, our cat felt the need to supervise people baths.
> >> Sitting right on the edge of the tub. With his tail dangling _into_
the
> >> water.
> >>
> >> I don't recall ever finding out his opinion of a -cat- bath. But he did
> >> like to be _vacuumed_. Directly by the hose of a regular canister
vacuum.
> >
> >Never encountered a cat that wouldn't run in terror from a vacuum. OTOH,
> >the neighbor's cat used to like to come over and get swept with a broom.
>
> What can I say. The cat was practically bigger than the vacuum was.
<grin>
> Anyway, he'd just lay down on his side, and when one side was done, he'd
> roll over.
>
> I don't remember how he got _introduced_ to it, but this was an _old_
> green Eureka canister. It was extremely quiet, despite having a lot of
> pulling power. Did a _great_ job of pulling out the old winter
under-coat,
> come spring time.
>
> I gotta tell ya, vacuuming the livestock is a whole *lot* more efficient
> than having to vacuum all the furniture, rugs, etc. to pick up shed hairs.
>
> >> We also had a big Chesapeake Retriever who would 'shake'
_on_command_ --
> >> no, not 'shake hands', though he did that too, but after a bath. We
would
> >> tell him 'stand still', tent a big towel over him, and say 'Okay, _now_
> >> shake', whereupon he would. Was also _real_ handy when bringing him in
> >> from outside when it was raining or snowing.
> >
> >Probably a big surprise for those who can't resist giving orders to
somebody
> >else's dog too.
>
> Chesapeake's are *smart* -- _ANNOYINGLY_ smart. However, in this case,
he
> knew the difference between 'sit' / 'shake', and 'stand still' / 'now
shake'.
> Heck, for 'shake' (hands), if you put out your left hand, he'd use his
left
> paw, and if you put out your right hand, he'd use his right paw. And if
you
> then said 'the other one' he'd drop whichever paw he had up, and offer
'the
> other one'.
>
> The 'stand still... OK, now shake' DID impress the hell out of any
visitors
> who happened to see it -- almost invariably the reaction was "I wouldn't
> have believed it, if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes!"
i shower my 4 cats pretty regularly. with 2 of them, i have to bang them
pretty good with the vacuum to get them to move. they're not afraid of it at
all and must think i'm pretty annoying when i want them to move.
Old Nick wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:56:33 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> vaguely proposed a theory
> ......and in reply I say!:
>
> remove ns from my header address to reply via email
>
>
>>> We also had a big Chesapeake Retriever who would 'shake' _on_command_ --
>>> no, not 'shake hands', though he did that too, but after a bath. We
>>> would tell him 'stand still', tent a big towel over him, and say 'Okay,
>>> _now_
>>> shake', whereupon he would. Was also _real_ handy when bringing him in
>>> from outside when it was raining or snowing.
>>
>>Probably a big surprise for those who can't resist giving orders to
>>somebody else's dog too.
>
> Hehe! Hate em. Had one the other day. As soon as he saw the dog he
> commented that she was "Juuust not overweight" (she's not overweight),
> and then told her to sit (which the bugger did much faster for him
> than for me, but hey, it was probably surprise) for no reason at all.
> Then he said "shake, and held his hand down to her paw. I said "She
> doesn't shake" ......and he just held his hand there. It felt good to
> see her just Sit, as ordered and look at him! <G>.
>
> I reckon they are just one step form the guys who can't help hitting
> on everyone's partner. It's a power thing.
>
> I can understand why you get the average retriever to learn to shake
> water on command! However, all my dogs have learned that one. As was
> said it's very useful.
My favorite in that regard was the mutt (i.e. of no identifiable breed--the
closest one could narrow it down to was that it wasn't a cat) that learned
a command that sounded an awful lot like "sit". He didn't know or do "sit"
but sometimes if someone told him to "sit" he'd do the command that he did
know.
> *****************************************************
> It's not the milk and honey we hate. It's having it
> rammed down our throats.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Robert Galloway wrote:
> Do you have any record of spontaneous combustion coming about from dried
> wood, subsequently rendered wet as he describes? Don't think it happens.
I'd rather not find out the hard way. Spontaneous combustion _can_ occur
with _dry_ wood but it takes a big pile. Get a little rot going and who
knows--that's pretty much the mechanism by which haystacks catch fire after
a rain. While spontaneous combustion is the topic of a certain amount of
research I don't think it can be described as a perfectly understood
phenomenon.
>
> rhg
>
>
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> Joe Emenaker wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Okay, this is probably is going to strike most of you as a horrific
>>>idea... but the more I thought about it, the more sense (or, at least,
>>>the less nonsense) it made.
>>>
>>>Back when I was making my own Biesemeyer clone
>>>(http://joe.emenaker.com/Table-Saw%20Fence/Table-Saw%20Fence.html), I
>>>was cutting a lot of angle-iron and steel tubing on my RAS fitted with
>>>a metal-cutting wheel. Boy, did that thing make sparks like the
>>>dickens! I thought it was going to ignite the sawdust which had
>>>accumulated behind the RAS from earlier projects.
>>>
>>>Well, I'm about to buy a DC and make my own cyclone for it. It struck
>>>me that I'd be *asking* for trouble if I tried cutting metal with a DC
>>>hooked up and running.
>>>
>>>But what if I had a cyclone which emptied into a bin with a little
>>>water in it? The water would catch all/most of those sparks. Not only
>>>that, but it would be nice just for plain wood chips, since it would
>>>help keep them under control when you detatch the bid to dump it
>>>out... and it would help guard against some other DC-related fire
>>>hazards (like hitting a nail or something).
>>>
>>>So, I figured I'd ask: Does anybody out there *do* this?
>>>Alternatively, has this been discussed before?
>>
>>
>> Now you end up with damp wood with an oxygen source. Can you say
>> "spontaneous combustion"?
>>
>>>- Joe
>>
>>
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Richard Clements <[email protected]> writes:
>>I'm going to have to go with Dave on this, growing up my dad was the fire
>>chief in a rural town in eastern ID, my grandfather was the fire chief in
>>Rexburg( 3 miles away), according to them you should NEVER leave wet
>>Organic material, hey, sawdust, grass clipping, etc. where they can't dry,
>
> Does that mean I can't put them in a closed compost bin then? They
> surely won't dry there (but they will get pretty warm).
The key there is _closed_. No oxygen.
>>they'll begin to rot which makes heat, then they start to smolder, and as
>>soon as there exposed to air (like dumping the container) they'll burst
>>into flames, ever wonder why the trash company doesn't want to take yard
>>clipping?
>
> My trash company takes yard waste. One can either rent a bin
> from the City or pile the stuff in the street for pickup.
>
> scott
>
> (However, I just emptied the DC into the compost pile last weekend, and
> within a couple of hours, the chips (on the top of the pile) were at well
> over 110 degree F - Now, mind you, I was jointing and planing both green
> 2x6's and KD studs, so there was definitely green wood in the pile).
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
George wrote:
> Yep, on record as saying that, absent the volatile organics which are the
> source of the ignition, you have wet sawdust, which won't burn on its own
> or
> with a flame until the water is expelled. Fresh sawdust and fresh hay
> outgas the same.
>
> The wonderful thing about science is that there is a cause - effect,
> reproducible outcome.
>
> You find yourself approached to serve on many product liability juries?
> Seems you're what the ambulance chasers would like.
George, comments like that make it clear that you can't stand to have anyone
disagree with you and when you can't convince someone with facts and
figures (and you're not going to with the kind of assertions you're making
because you're assuming that the existence of one mechanism of ignition
precludes the existence of others and further, you're arguing that in the
presence of unknowns one should take the dangerous path rather than then
safe one) you'd rather insult them than agree to disagree and get on with
your life.
If science knew everything then the scientists would be out of a job.
Remember that.
> "Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:12:07 -0400, George <george@least> wrote:
>> > As I said before, it is volatile organics produced by _GREEN_ hay or
> manure,
>> > or sawdust which ignite.
>>
>> You seem to be equating my "fresh sawdust" with "green hay or manure"
>> now, which is most decidedly not what I had written.
>>
>>
>> > http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/livestock/dairy/facts/hayfires.htm
>>
>> Yes, I'm familiar with wet hay fires. Are you going on record as saying
>> damp sawdust cannot spontaneously combust? How sure are you of this?
>> Showing that hay combusts for reason (A), and showing that sawdust does
>> not have reason (A), does not mean sawdust does not spontaneously
>> combust, it just means it doesn't spontaneously combust _for that precise
>> reason_. Yes?
>>
>>
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
George wrote:
> It's not me you should agree with, it's reality.
>
> Find another source of ignition anywhere but in your imagination?
I would much rather it be in my imagination than in my dust collector.
> Please let us know.
>
> The water of precise knowledge is in front of you. Drink.
ROF,L.
> "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> If science knew everything then the scientists would be out of a job.
>> Remember that.
>>
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
G. Lewin wrote:
> George wrote:
>
>> Yep, on record as saying that, absent the volatile organics which are the
>> source of the ignition, you have wet sawdust, which won't burn on its own
>> or
>> with a flame until the water is expelled. Fresh sawdust and fresh hay
>> outgas the same.
>
> That's quite a brash statement (that they outgas the same). But I like
> the way you make brash (or ambiguous) statements and then mock everyone
> who disagrees. It makes the internet worth while.
>
> Anyway, to the matter at hand...a cursory search of the internet, which
> as we know never provides false information, shows many examples of
> spontaneously combusting sawdust, albeit usually at the bottom of a 20'
> mound. I did, however, find an example of a fire caused by a "pile of
> sawdust under a sawbench." How big a pile? I dunno'. See:
>
> <http://www.news-mail.com.au/news/0603/280603_2.html>
>
> Likely, the dust was from green wood.
>
> -----
>
> Now, because of the nature of the danger, this problem has actually been
> studied (believe it or not, we need not concern ourselves with hay
> fires!). The following absolute truth was also found on the internet:
>
> From <http://www.ciwm.co.uk/mediastore/FILES/10867.pdf>:
>
> "As with compost and rubber tyres, wood chips and sawdust material can
> undergo self-heating reactions, leading to spontaneous combustion, under
> certain storage conditions. Factors that will play a part in whether
> self-heating leading to combustion will occur are the size of the wood
> chips, the moisture content, the presence of other flammable waste
> materials within the stockpile that are easily ignitable, and the
> natural oil content of the wood. Sawdust has been tested extensively[1]
> over any years and it has been found that the greater the proportion of
> oil present in the wood, the lower the critical ignition temperature
> (the temperature at which a runaway reaction occurs)."
>
> 1. Bowes, P C. Self-heating: evaluating and controlling the hazards.
> Building Research Establishment. Department of the Environment. 1984.
> HMSO.
>
> It seems this Bowes fella' made a career out of this stuff. Even though
> he died in 2001, he was nice enough to write it all down in a book.
> Sadly, now that I'm no longer a student, I can't get my hands on it
> easily. But maybe if one of you could find it, it could settle the
> matter of whether or not s.c. is possible in this case. It might also
> answer the more immediate question of who can piss farther.
>
> In the above, I note the following:
>
> 1) Oil content is critical. How much oil is in sawdust from green wood
> vs. dust from air dried vs. kilned, I don't know. Anyone?
There's also how much oil in one species vs another, say Southern Longleaf
Yellow Pine heartwood vs some comparatively oilless species, and the
composition of the oil--Lapacho for example is about as combustible as
concrete, despite being oily enough that you can polish it with its own
secretions.
>
> 2) Note that several other factors, including other oil sources are
> important. This certainly has bearing on the original poster's question.
> Does, for example, it make a difference if he cuts plywood or any
> other source of organics? What if he hacks up an old project that was
> treated with linseed oil?
>
> I suspect that if one read the book, you'd be hard pressed to make a
> case for s.c. at this small a scale (especially since the water content
> must be just right); nevertheless, I bet you _could_ come up with a
> scenario, albeit unlikely. Would I worry about it? No. But I'm not silly
> enough to put water in my DC system...
>
> -----
>
> As for hay, I found this incontrovertible evidence (of course, because
> it's on the internet):
>
> From <http://www.cdc.gov/nasd/docs/d000701-d000800/d000758/d000758.pdf>
>
> "Hay fires usually occur within six weeks of baling, but they may occur
> in hay several years old. Fire can occur in loose hay, small bales,
> large bales or in stacks. The fires can occur in hay stored inside as
> well as in hay stored outside. Regardless of when or where the fires
> occur, the most common cause is excessive moisture."
>
> Note that "old" hay is also subject to s.c., the point being that once
> dried, s.c. is rare because, well, it's dry. But if re-wetted, I see no
> reason why bacterial growth can't restart. Of course the C:N ratio of
> wood is so high that it's hard to get a lot of bacterial growth and heat
> production, but that obviously happened in the s.c. examples above. I
> have certainly felt warmth in sawdust piles, but they were outside where
> heat/organics couldn't build up enough for s.c.
>
> Anyway, the point is that if you want to claim that hay and sawdust
> outgas the same, then if old hay can s.c., then surely you agree that
> old sawdust can, too. Yes?
>
>> The wonderful thing about science is that there is a cause - effect,
>> reproducible outcome.
>
> Well, of course there is. But if we don't understand _all_ of the
> factors involved, then changing the input (cause) may lead to an
> unexpected result (effect). That is why scientists have jobs -- because
> not everything is understood.
>
> Enjoy,
>
> Greg
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Hey guys, go check out this site... they used wood chips and compost to heat
water to over 140 degrees!
http://www.motherearthnews.com/menarch/archive/issues/062/062-092-01.htm
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
> > Richard Clements <[email protected]> writes:
> >>I'm going to have to go with Dave on this, growing up my dad was the
fire
> >>chief in a rural town in eastern ID, my grandfather was the fire chief
in
> >>Rexburg( 3 miles away), according to them you should NEVER leave wet
> >>Organic material, hey, sawdust, grass clipping, etc. where they can't
dry,
> >
> > Does that mean I can't put them in a closed compost bin then? They
> > surely won't dry there (but they will get pretty warm).
>
> The key there is _closed_. No oxygen.
>
> >>they'll begin to rot which makes heat, then they start to smolder, and
as
> >>soon as there exposed to air (like dumping the container) they'll burst
> >>into flames, ever wonder why the trash company doesn't want to take yard
> >>clipping?
> >
> > My trash company takes yard waste. One can either rent a bin
> > from the City or pile the stuff in the street for pickup.
> >
> > scott
> >
> > (However, I just emptied the DC into the compost pile last weekend, and
> > within a couple of hours, the chips (on the top of the pile) were at
well
> > over 110 degree F - Now, mind you, I was jointing and planing both green
> > 2x6's and KD studs, so there was definitely green wood in the pile).
>
> --
> --John
> Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)