Hey,
I bought a compressor from a garage sale yesterday.
Paid $20, seems to be between 13 and 20 gallons.
What I wanted was an oil type compressor that uses a belt.
I could not take the oil less type of noise anymore.
I thought I was taking a risk, pretty rusted on the outside, but didn't
appear deeply rusted. I shook the thing did not hear water in it (WRONG)...
When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most rusted
water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
So what chance do I have of saving this tank? Where I used to live we
had a scales air compressor place nearby but they closed... I don't find
any of them around any more.. not close by.
The rust on the outside is all superficial and can be sanded and painted
... I need to get into the tank with a 3/4 square end and see..
Anyone have some real info on how to treat this?
Thanks.
--
Jeff
Well, it may have had a pint/quart of water, but the rusting factor would d=
epend on the amount of oxygen reacting with the iron to produce a quantity =
of rust. In a closed container, the rust may be much less than if contents=
were exposed to more open air.
Not just open it, but can you remove the whole petcock assembly, without br=
eaking it? What size hole is in the tank, there, 1/2", 3/4"? If you can r=
emove the assembly, rinse out the tank, well, then rinse with denatured alc=
ohol. Allow to dry, as best it can, before reinstalling the petcock.=20
If I had a questionably badly rusted tank, I might entertain the idea of ri=
nsing/sloshing the bottom of the tank with muratic acid, to see what all mi=
ght be washed out. Rinse with water, afterwards. I would think the very bo=
ttom is rusted the most, if significantly.
Sonny
On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:05:31 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Well, it may have had a pint/quart of water, but the rusting factor would depend on the amount of oxygen reacting with the iron to produce a quantity of rust. In a closed container, the rust may be much less than if contents were exposed to more open air.
An air tank has plenty of oxygen in it. High pressure == more oxygen.
>Not just open it, but can you remove the whole petcock assembly, without breaking it? What size hole is in the tank, there, 1/2", 3/4"? If you can remove the assembly, rinse out the tank, well, then rinse with denatured alcohol. Allow to dry, as best it can, before reinstalling the petcock.
It's just going to get "wet" again, at the first use. It's sorta
unavoidable, unless you live in AZ. ;-)
>If I had a questionably badly rusted tank, I might entertain the idea of rinsing/sloshing the bottom of the tank with muratic acid, to see what all might be washed out. Rinse with water, afterwards. I would think the very bottom is rusted the most, if significantly.
That sounds like a really bad idea. The rust isn't going to hurt
anything more than it already has. HCL does corrode steel, which is
*not* useful. If the worry is polluting the air stream, filter it. If
that doesn't work, filter it some more. ;-)
On May 5, 7:14=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 5/5/13 6:26 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 5/5/2013 6:45 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> >> On 5/5/13 4:21 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> >>> On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> >>>> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> >>>>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> >>>>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
> >>>>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
> >>>>>> rusted
> >>>>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>
> >>>>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>
> >>>>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
> >>>>> Does it still compress air?
> >>>>> You drained out the water.
> >>>>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>
> >>>>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
> >>>>> inside of the tanks we use every day. =A0:-)
>
> >>>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
> >>>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
> >>>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
> >>>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>
> >>> I also remember that there used to be an additive to tanks to protect
> >>> them.
> >>> I knew what it was 30 years ago.
>
> >>> Might be too late, but anyone know what the name is.
>
> >> I'm going on 13 years with my current compressor and it work like
> >> the day I bought it. =A0I think i remember letting a few ounces of wat=
er
> >> out of it several years ago. =A0Yes, it was brown.
>
> >> To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
> >> out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
> >> spraying using the compressor.
>
> >> I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
>
> > Years ago I read about a tank having a catastrophic failure. It didn't
> > just pinhole, it blew from rust.
>
> > So I worry, I wanted to bring this into the basement. My current one
> > wakes me up at night when I forget to shut it...
>
> > This one will be quieter if I forget. But I need to know it will be ok.
>
> I keep hearing about it, too, but it's always a friend of a friend of an
> uncle's boss.
> And I hear about it being from rust, too, but it's never confirmed.
> There are always other factors responsible when investigations are done.
> I've seen articles about talks in big shops "exploding" and causing
> damage and injuries.
> These are usually big, big tanks and the injured were standing nearby
> and got cut by metal shards still attached to the tank.
>
> 13-20 gallon tank isn't going to "explode" with enough force to cause
> the kind of damage you read about. BTW, when the pressure in mine gets
> to high, the pressure release valve lets out a bunch of air. If you're
> doesn't have one of those, it's probably a good idea to instal one.
>
> --
>
> =A0 -MIKE-
>
> =A0 "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
> =A0 =A0 =A0--Elvin Jones =A0(1927-2004)
> =A0 --
> =A0http://mikedrums.com
> =A0 [email protected]
> =A0 ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
http://www.cpsc.gov/PageFiles/80175/sanborn2.pdf
"woodchucker" wrote:
> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
> rusted
> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
------------------------------------------------
So what else is knew?
------------------------------------------------
> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
--------------------------------------------------
So the owner is a little forgetful.
Question: What is the condition of the relief valve?
----------------------------------------------------
> So I worry, I wanted to bring this into the basement. My current one
> wakes me up at night when I forget to shut it...
------------------------------------------------------
IMHO, only a fool would keep and air compressor in the basement
or other confined space.
When it comes to pressurized vessels around your home, assume
they are going to explode and plan accordingly.
Lew
Keith Nuttle <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> I would believe that the question is not how much water or how much
> rust, but what is the remaining thickness of the metal making up the
> tank. If the tank has sit for years has the bottom nearly rusted
> through?
>
> If it rusted and significantly decreased the thickness of the tank
> wall is it general or is it such that when it fails it will pin hole
> and leak slowly or fail catastrophically.
>
> I have never seen a tank fail, but.................
>
I saw one failed intentionally on TV. I think it was Time Warp where
they dropped a 5 or 10 gallon tank off a building on to a spike. Big
noise, lots of pressure released, and the tank went flying. Very fun to
watch.
Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.
On 05/05/2013 02:21 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>>>> rusted
>>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
>>> Does it still compress air?
>>> You drained out the water.
>>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>>>
>>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
>>> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>>>
>>>
>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>>
> I also remember that there used to be an additive to tanks to protect them.
> I knew what it was 30 years ago.
>
> Might be too late, but anyone know what the name is.
>
Don't know about that stuff, but I put the HF automatic compressor drain
on mine:
<http://www.harborfreight.com/catalogsearch/result?q=automatic+compressor+drain>
I did have to fart around and replace the plastic tubing with copper
tubing. It's been working fine for about 12 years.
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
On 5/5/2013 6:46 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> woodchucker wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank? Where I used to live we
>> had a scales air compressor place nearby but they closed... I don't
>> find any of them around any more.. not close by.
>> The rust on the outside is all superficial and can be sanded and
>> painted ... I need to get into the tank with a 3/4 square end and
>> see.. Anyone have some real info on how to treat this?
>>
>
> You can buy sealers that you can pour into the tank after you dry it out
> (throw some rocks in it, shake them around good first). Look for gas tank
> sealers. A compressor tank will go for years like that though. Hard to say
> without seeing the tank, knocking on it to see how the steel sounds, etc.,
> but just because it poured out rusty water is not cause to get too worried
> just yet.
>
"just yet". LOL.
I like that. It's kinda like when your dentist says, "OOPS!
"-MIKE-" <
> 13-20 gallon tank isn't going to "explode" with enough force to
> cause
> the kind of damage you read about. BTW, when the pressure in mine
> gets
> to high, the pressure release valve lets out a bunch of air. If
> you're
> doesn't have one of those, it's probably a good idea to instal one.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
pressure
cookers in Boston were/are?
BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
Even your hot water tank has one.
Lew
On Thu, 09 May 2013 11:51:24 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/9/13 12:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:46 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>>> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>>> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>>> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>>
>> One thing I was wondering, did these Boston bombers make a practice
>> bomb first anywhere? Was there ever any mention of that? After all, if
>> someone intends to go out with their homemade bomb to do some damage,
>> they usually want to know if the damned thing will work before they
>> head out.
>>
>
>Short answer, who knows?
>Long answer, these guys get training on this stuff from very scary
>people. The more they investigate this, I suspect it will show they had
>overseas al qaeda training.
They didn't need such "training" (though that's not to say that it
didn't happen). Everything needed to make such a bomb is on the WWW.
Terrorist-U is now an online curriculum.
>That said, there have been many attempts in the US that have failed.
>These don't make the headlines and when they do, it's not for long.
Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>> pressure
>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>
>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>
>> Even your hot water tank has one.
------------------------------------------------------------------
"-MIKE-" wrote:
> I hope you're joking.
> There was a lot more than air in those things.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the source.
Lew
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
> pressure
> cookers in Boston were/are?
>
> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>
> Even your hot water tank has one.
------------------------------------------------------------------
"-MIKE-" wrote:
> I hope you're joking.
> There was a lot more than air in those things.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the
> source.
------------------------------------------------------------------
"-MIKE-" wrote:
> That's kind of the point. There is no shrapnel when an air tank
> "explodes."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lew Hodgett wrote:
What do you call the parts of the vessel that are created when
a vessel bursts?
Chopped liver?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"-MIKE-" wrote:
> Why do I keep putting explodes in quotation marks? Because of the
> very
> misconception you have and others are having. The energy from a
> bursting
> air tank is no where near enough to cause shrapnel.
>
> The energy caused by gun powder is many multitudes higher than an
> air
> tank. The velocity of the explosion is also many magnitudes higher.
>
> Oh, and last time I looked at air compressors, non of the tanks were
> packed with ball bearings, either. sheesh.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lew Hodgett wrote:
You seem to have difficulty understanding what is written.
I made no mention of gun powder, ball bearings or any other items of
IBS
(Intellectual Bull Shit) you attempt to introduce to confuse the
issue.
My comment simply stated that the size of the vessel is totally
independent of it's ability to raise the havoc created if it were to
burst
in an area where people were assembled.
What causes a vessel to exceed design specifications and fail
by bursting is a totally different discussion.
What remains relevant is that if a vessel bursts in an occupied area,
chances are pretty good that somebody is going to get hurt.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Lew
On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:16:51 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>
>>
>Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
May have been enough oil mixed in there so it was protected. The wet
portion may be better than the dry portion.
woodchucker wrote:
> Hey,
> I bought a compressor from a garage sale yesterday.
> Paid $20, seems to be between 13 and 20 gallons.
> What I wanted was an oil type compressor that uses a belt.
>
> I could not take the oil less type of noise anymore.
>
> I thought I was taking a risk, pretty rusted on the outside, but
> didn't appear deeply rusted. I shook the thing did not hear water in
> it (WRONG)...
>
> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
> rusted water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>
>
> So what chance do I have of saving this tank? Where I used to live we
> had a scales air compressor place nearby but they closed... I don't
> find any of them around any more.. not close by.
> The rust on the outside is all superficial and can be sanded and
> painted ... I need to get into the tank with a 3/4 square end and
> see.. Anyone have some real info on how to treat this?
>
> Thanks.
From Wikipedia:
--- begin quote
Phosphoric acid may be used as a "rust converter", by direct application to
rusted iron, steel tools, or surfaces. The phosphoric acid converts
reddish-brown iron(III) oxide, Fe2O3 (rust) to black ferric phosphate,
FePO4.
"Rust converter" is sometimes a greenish liquid suitable for dipping (in the
same sort of acid bath as is used for pickling metal), but it is more often
formulated as a gel, commonly called "naval jelly". It is sometimes sold
under other names, such as "rust remover" or "rust killer". As a thick gel,
it may be applied to sloping, vertical, or even overhead surfaces.
After treatment, the black ferric-phosphate coating can be scrubbed off,
leaving a fresh metal surface. Multiple applications of phosphoric acid may
be required to remove all rust. The black phosphate coating can also be left
in place, where it will provide moderate further corrosion resistance (such
protection is also provided by the superficially similar Parkerizing and
blued electrochemical conversion coating processes).
--- end quote
This is how "black pipe" (used for natural gas distribution) is created.
And, from one blogger:
"Look for it as Metal Prep oluton. It's available at any lumber yard, borg,
or hardware store in quarts and gallons in plastic bottles. I use Jasco out
of blind brand loyalty but it' a good consistant product. It has tuff in it
that makes it work better than the plain acid. I dilute it 10 to 1 in a 5
gallon pail. When the blue color fades the acid has pooped out so add more.
"It's sewer safe when exhausted. Or since the spent solution is mostly iron
phosphate it makes good fertilizer. Run it through a proportioning squirt
nozzle and water your flowers."
On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most rusted
>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>
>>>
>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>>
>>
>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
>> Does it still compress air?
>> You drained out the water.
>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>>
>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
>> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>>
>>
> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>
I also remember that there used to be an additive to tanks to protect them.
I knew what it was 30 years ago.
Might be too late, but anyone know what the name is.
--
Jeff
On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Do you *really*
>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>
>> I found this:
>>
>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>> centimeters of gas,"
>>
>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>
>Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>
>And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
>case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
>kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
ANd a pressure cooker is often made of CAST Aluminum - which is
fragile / brittle in nature.
On 5/9/2013 9:52 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 5/9/2013 12:11 AM, CW wrote:
>>
>>
>> "-MIKE-" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>> On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>>
>> Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
>> for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
>>
>> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>> =================================================================
>> The pressure cooker is a needed part of the bomb. The pressure relief
>> valve is not an issue. The pressure build up is too fast for it to vent
>> it fast enough to make any difference. You could put the same components
>> in a paper bag instead of the pressure cooker and all you would get is a
>> fire.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I believe the vessel would have been better had it been stronger than a
> pressure cooker. Like a circuit breaker that protects the wiring in a
> house the 15 lb relief valve is to protect the cooker. I highly suspect
> that the lid popped off long before the potential was reached with the
> powder burn.
Agreed.
--
Jeff
"-MIKE-" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>
>
> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
> hear, at 15 lbs.
Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
=================================================================
The pressure cooker is a needed part of the bomb. The pressure relief valve
is not an issue. The pressure build up is too fast for it to vent it fast
enough to make any difference. You could put the same components in a paper
bag instead of the pressure cooker and all you would get is a fire.
On 5/6/2013 2:47 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>
> It's not very hard to remove the safety valve and replace it with a nut and bolt.
>
Correct. You would also have to defeat the secondary pressure relief
and probably glue the lid on.
I made this comment more to address Lew's comment when comparing
pressure in a compressor to a pressure cooker being an explosive container.
The compressor in no way would possibly have a comparable amount of
pressure that the pressure cooker with the explosives had nor would it
come apart the same should it fail under normal operating conditions.
Relatively speaking I seriously doubt that a pressure cooker would
contain the extreme pressure generated in an explosive inside more than
say a shoe box. With every thing that was in the pressure cooker to
create the damage the weight would have probably been too great for a
shoe box to hold up. I wold be willing to bet the the lids gave way first.
[email protected] wrote in news:[email protected]:
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:km8ne6$4hj$1
@speranza.aioe.org:
>>
>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you *really*
>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>
>>> I found this:
>>>
>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>
>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>
>>Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>>powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>>atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>>
>>And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
>>case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>>these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
>>kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>
> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>
Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't even come close to
developing that kind of pressure.
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
> hear, at 15 lbs.
It's not very hard to remove the safety valve and replace it with a nut and bolt.
"woodchucker" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 5/9/2013 9:52 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 5/9/2013 12:11 AM, CW wrote:
>>
>>
>> "-MIKE-" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>> On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>>
>> Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
>> for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
>>
>> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>> =================================================================
>> The pressure cooker is a needed part of the bomb. The pressure relief
>> valve is not an issue. The pressure build up is too fast for it to vent
>> it fast enough to make any difference. You could put the same components
>> in a paper bag instead of the pressure cooker and all you would get is a
>> fire.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I believe the vessel would have been better had it been stronger than a
> pressure cooker. Like a circuit breaker that protects the wiring in a
> house the 15 lb relief valve is to protect the cooker. I highly suspect
> that the lid popped off long before the potential was reached with the
> powder burn.
Agreed.
=================================================================================================
If that was the case, it would amount to a shaped charge, pointed straight
up. It would be hell on ceilings and it would make it rain ball bearings.
The pressure build would be so fast that, by time the locking lugs yielded,
the pressure would be so high that the whole thing would fracture. Consider
to that pressure cookers are cast. Cast aluminum is quite brittle. Chances
are high that the lid let go before the rest of it. Maybe a pico second
before.
--
Jeff
On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Do you *really*
>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>
>> I found this:
>>
>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>> centimeters of gas,"
>>
>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>
>Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>
>And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
>case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
>kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
On Sat, 11 May 2013 14:33:19 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>I *highly* doubt it was "designed" to do anything but make a bang and
>kill people. The lid obviously stayed intact (as I would have
>expected) so much of the energy would be naturally out the side. I
>doubt that this was in any way a "design" goal.
I agree. These weren't very sophisticated bombs. The nails and ball
bearings were the only 'design' aspect part and intended to cause as
much carnage as possible
On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>
>
> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
> hear, at 15 lbs.
Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 5/9/13 12:11 AM, CW wrote:
>
>
> "-MIKE-" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>>
>>
>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>
> Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
> for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
>
> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
> =================================================================
> The pressure cooker is a needed part of the bomb. The pressure relief
> valve is not an issue. The pressure build up is too fast for it to vent
> it fast enough to make any difference. You could put the same components
> in a paper bag instead of the pressure cooker and all you would get is a
> fire.
>
The only point that is pertinent in this discussion is that there is no
blast powder in a compressor air tank. :-)
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 5/9/13 12:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:43:02 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/13 7:56 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>>>> pressure
>>>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>>>
>>>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>>>
>>>> Even your hot water tank has one.
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>>
>>>> I hope you're joking.
>>>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>
>>>> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the
>>>> source.
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's kind of the point. There is no shrapnel when an air tank
>>>> "explodes."
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>
>>> What do you call the parts of the vessel that are created when
>>> a vessel bursts?
>>>
>>> Chopped liver?
>>>
>>
>> Shrapnel: Fragments of a bomb, shell, or other object thrown out by an
>> explosion.
>> When an air tank fails from over pressure there is not enough energy to
>> create shrapnel.
>> Could a part come flying off, perhaps. But that is certainly a very
>> loose interpretation of the accepted definition when talking about true
>> explosions.
>>
>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why do I keep putting explodes in quotation marks? Because of the
>>>> very
>>>> misconception you have and others are having. The energy from a
>>>> bursting
>>>> air tank is no where near enough to cause shrapnel.
>>>>
>>>> The energy caused by gun powder is many multitudes higher than an
>>>> air
>>>> tank. The velocity of the explosion is also many magnitudes higher.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, and last time I looked at air compressors, non of the tanks were
>>>> packed with ball bearings, either. sheesh.
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>
>>> You seem to have difficulty understanding what is written.
>>>
>>> I made no mention of gun powder, ball bearings or any other items of
>>> IBS
>>> (Intellectual Bull Shit) you attempt to introduce to confuse the
>>> issue.
>>>
>>
>> Quit bullshitting and digging the hole deeper. We're talking air tanks
>> failing from over pressurization and you're the one who brought up the
>> marathon bombers' pressure cooker bombs. YOU are the one attempting to
>> confuse the issue by introducing a BOMB into a conversation about air
>> compressors.
>>
>>
>>> My comment simply stated that the size of the vessel is totally
>>> independent of it's ability to raise the havoc created if it were to
>>> burst in an area where people were assembled.
>>>
>>> What causes a vessel to exceed design specifications and fail
>>> by bursting is a totally different discussion.
>>>
>>> What remains relevant is that if a vessel bursts in an occupied area,
>>> chances are pretty good that somebody is going to get hurt.
>>>
>>> Nothing more, nothing less.
>>>
>>> Lew
>>>
>>
>> I can pop a balloon ("vessel burst") in an occupied area? Who gets hurt?
>>
>> There has to be enough energy to create the shrapnel. Even without
>> shrapnel, there would have to be a enough energy released to create a
>> pressure wave for anyone to be injured seriously. How do you not get that?
>>
>> An air compressor "vessel" "bursting" has a tiny fraction of the energy
>> of a bomb. Aren't you the engineer, here? How do you not see that?
> Perhaps, but IF it fails catastrophically - like a brittle fracture
> ( and they DO happen very occaisionally) they ARE very dangerous.
>
> A hydrogen embrittled 20 gallon tank, 1/8" thick, at 200 psi could do
> greivous harm to anyone within 20 feet.or more if struck, by say, a
> falling hammer or other flying debris.
>
But where is the evidence of this happening. I'm not talking about
damage or injury. I'm talking shrapnel, because that's what was brought
up early in this discussion.
I remember the mythbusters episode where they pumped up an air talk way
beyond normal operating pressure, having disabled the relief valve. They
proceeded to ram all kinds of stuff into it, even shooting it with a gun
and could not get it to "explode."
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 5/6/2013 12:21 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you *really*
>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>
>>> I found this:
>>>
>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>
>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>
>> Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>> powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>> atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>>
>> And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
>> case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>> these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
>> kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>
> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>
Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
hear, at 15 lbs.
On 5/9/2013 12:11 AM, CW wrote:
>
>
> "-MIKE-" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>>
>>
>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>
> Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
> for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
>
> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
> =================================================================
> The pressure cooker is a needed part of the bomb. The pressure relief
> valve is not an issue. The pressure build up is too fast for it to vent
> it fast enough to make any difference. You could put the same components
> in a paper bag instead of the pressure cooker and all you would get is a
> fire.
>
>
>
I believe the vessel would have been better had it been stronger than a
pressure cooker. Like a circuit breaker that protects the wiring in a
house the 15 lb relief valve is to protect the cooker. I highly suspect
that the lid popped off long before the potential was reached with the
powder burn.
On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:43:02 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/7/13 7:56 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>
>>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>>> pressure
>>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>>
>>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>>
>>> Even your hot water tank has one.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>
>>> I hope you're joking.
>>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>
>>> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the
>>> source.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>
>>> That's kind of the point. There is no shrapnel when an air tank
>>> "explodes."
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>
>> What do you call the parts of the vessel that are created when
>> a vessel bursts?
>>
>> Chopped liver?
>>
>
>Shrapnel: Fragments of a bomb, shell, or other object thrown out by an
>explosion.
>When an air tank fails from over pressure there is not enough energy to
>create shrapnel.
>Could a part come flying off, perhaps. But that is certainly a very
>loose interpretation of the accepted definition when talking about true
>explosions.
>
>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>
>>> Why do I keep putting explodes in quotation marks? Because of the
>>> very
>>> misconception you have and others are having. The energy from a
>>> bursting
>>> air tank is no where near enough to cause shrapnel.
>>>
>>> The energy caused by gun powder is many multitudes higher than an
>>> air
>>> tank. The velocity of the explosion is also many magnitudes higher.
>>>
>>> Oh, and last time I looked at air compressors, non of the tanks were
>>> packed with ball bearings, either. sheesh.
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>
>> You seem to have difficulty understanding what is written.
>>
>> I made no mention of gun powder, ball bearings or any other items of
>> IBS
>> (Intellectual Bull Shit) you attempt to introduce to confuse the
>> issue.
>>
>
>Quit bullshitting and digging the hole deeper. We're talking air tanks
>failing from over pressurization and you're the one who brought up the
>marathon bombers' pressure cooker bombs. YOU are the one attempting to
>confuse the issue by introducing a BOMB into a conversation about air
>compressors.
>
>
>> My comment simply stated that the size of the vessel is totally
>> independent of it's ability to raise the havoc created if it were to
>> burst in an area where people were assembled.
>>
>> What causes a vessel to exceed design specifications and fail
>> by bursting is a totally different discussion.
>>
>> What remains relevant is that if a vessel bursts in an occupied area,
>> chances are pretty good that somebody is going to get hurt.
>>
>> Nothing more, nothing less.
>>
>> Lew
>>
>
>I can pop a balloon ("vessel burst") in an occupied area? Who gets hurt?
>
>There has to be enough energy to create the shrapnel. Even without
>shrapnel, there would have to be a enough energy released to create a
>pressure wave for anyone to be injured seriously. How do you not get that?
>
>An air compressor "vessel" "bursting" has a tiny fraction of the energy
>of a bomb. Aren't you the engineer, here? How do you not see that?
Perhaps, but IF it fails catastrophically - like a brittle fracture
( and they DO happen very occaisionally) they ARE very dangerous.
A hydrogen embrittled 20 gallon tank, 1/8" thick, at 200 psi could do
greivous harm to anyone within 20 feet.or more if struck, by say, a
falling hammer or other flying debris.
On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most rusted
>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>
>>
>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>
>
> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
> Does it still compress air?
> You drained out the water.
> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>
> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>
>
Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
--
Jeff
I know it isn't near as much of an adventure when compared to acid
washes, cleaning rust and sealing, ultrasound inspections, and all
other kinds of solutions, but why not just buy a new tank and be done
with it?
http://tinyurl.com/cptqhe4
You could even wait for the ever present 20% off coupon.
We have done this to several compressors over the years. I have seen
tanks leak, but never rupture. What I see is tanks damaged badly
enough from dropping the compressors while loading or unloading them
for daily use, loading material on top of them, and then just plain
wear and tear from carrying them from job to job.
To do this easily, the original tank assembly is bypassed or removed,
and in some cases the motor/head is mounted to something else, and
this tank along with a manifold is used to replace the original. You
cannot mount a motor/head to this as purchased, so this is a perfect
time to put the compressor in its own little corner and the tank out
of the way. All you need to connect the two is inexpensive air hose.
Not as much fun as some of the ideas here, but if you leave the old
compressor on its original pinnings, you can be up and running with
one of these tanks in about 20 minutes. I have one of these (bought
mine at Northern) and it works great. I like the extra tank capacity,
too.
Robert
On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:16:51 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
>Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
In other words, you're afraid that the tank might be on the verge of
blowing up in your face, right?
Compression takes in poor condition, usually develop pinhole leaks
first, which would indicate that it's time for you to replace it. Of
course, you could replace it now, but most people continue to use them
until they start to leak.
In other words, you can use it until there's a problem.
On 5/5/2013 6:45 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 5/5/13 4:21 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>>>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>>>>> rusted
>>>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
>>>> Does it still compress air?
>>>> You drained out the water.
>>>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>>>>
>>>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
>>>> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>>>
>> I also remember that there used to be an additive to tanks to protect
>> them.
>> I knew what it was 30 years ago.
>>
>> Might be too late, but anyone know what the name is.
>>
>
> I'm going on 13 years with my current compressor and it work like
> the day I bought it. I think i remember letting a few ounces of water
> out of it several years ago. Yes, it was brown.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
> out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
> spraying using the compressor.
>
> I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
>
>
Years ago I read about a tank having a catastrophic failure. It didn't
just pinhole, it blew from rust.
So I worry, I wanted to bring this into the basement. My current one
wakes me up at night when I forget to shut it...
This one will be quieter if I forget. But I need to know it will be ok.
--
Jeff
"Leon" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 5/6/2013 4:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 14:37:18 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/6/2013 12:21 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you *really*
>>>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>>>
>>>>> I found this:
>>>>>
>>>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>>>
>>>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>>>
>>>> Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 =
>>>> 18.5 grams of black
>>>> powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a
>>>> pressure of, say, 25
>>>> atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a
>>>> pound.
>>>>
>>>> And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which
>>>> we know is not the
>>>> case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball
>>>> bearings and nails
>>>> these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only
>>>> about 2.5 liters, and a
>>>> kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>>>
>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>
> Sure, but that's not going to relieve much of the blast pressure. What
> does mean, I suppose, is that the cooker is only designed for 1ATM, or
> so (*much* less than a compressor tank).
>
That is what I was getting at. I am sure the lids popped off first. I
think pressure cookers were used simply because they are relative strong
for carrying weight and are not them selves heavy. It was the exploding
contents, not the pressure build up because of the pressure cookers
ability to hold pressure that caused the damage. Sure it was part of
the shrapnel but a metal ammo box would have done the same thing.
========================================================================
Black powder, unrestrained, will not explode. It will burn releasing its
energy into the atmosphere without much effect. It has to be compressed.
The pressure cooker is what makes it a bomb. On a stove, the pressure build
up is relatively slow, giving the top, the weakest part, time to distort and
separate. If it is filled with black powder, the pressure build up is so
fast that the lid does not have time to distort and detach itself. The
entire container will let loose. A weaker container such as an ammo can,
would not produce near the blast that a pressure cooker would.
[email protected] wrote in news:[email protected]:
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 18:20:30 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>[email protected] wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:km8ne6$4hj$1
>>@speranza.aioe.org:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you *really*
>>>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>>>
>>>>> I found this:
>>>>>
>>>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>>>
>>>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>>>
>>>>Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>>>>powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>>>>atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>>>>
>>>>And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not
the
>>>>case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>>>>these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and
a
>>>>kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>>>
>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>
>>Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't even come close
to
>>developing that kind of pressure.
>
> A pressure cooker can't either.
Did this discussion ruffle your hair at all?
On Mon, 6 May 2013 18:20:30 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:km8ne6$4hj$1
>@speranza.aioe.org:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do you *really*
>>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>>
>>>> I found this:
>>>>
>>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>>
>>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>>
>>>Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>>>powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>>>atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>>>
>>>And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
>>>case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>>>these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
>>>kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>>
>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>
>Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't even come close to
>developing that kind of pressure.
A pressure cooker can't either.
On Mon, 06 May 2013 14:37:18 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 5/6/2013 12:21 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do you *really*
>>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>>
>>>> I found this:
>>>>
>>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>>
>>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>>
>>> Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>>> powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>>> atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>>>
>>> And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
>>> case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>>> these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
>>> kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>>
>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>
>
>
>Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>hear, at 15 lbs.
Sure, but that's not going to relieve much of the blast pressure. What
does mean, I suppose, is that the cooker is only designed for 1ATM, or
so (*much* less than a compressor tank).
On 5/6/13 4:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>
>> Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't even come close to
>> developing that kind of pressure.
>
> A pressure cooker can't either.
>
Gun power can.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 5/6/2013 4:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 14:37:18 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/6/2013 12:21 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you *really*
>>>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>>>
>>>>> I found this:
>>>>>
>>>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>>>
>>>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>>>
>>>> Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>>>> powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>>>> atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>>>>
>>>> And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
>>>> case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>>>> these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
>>>> kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>>>
>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>
> Sure, but that's not going to relieve much of the blast pressure. What
> does mean, I suppose, is that the cooker is only designed for 1ATM, or
> so (*much* less than a compressor tank).
>
That is what I was getting at. I am sure the lids popped off first. I
think pressure cookers were used simply because they are relative strong
for carrying weight and are not them selves heavy. It was the exploding
contents, not the pressure build up because of the pressure cookers
ability to hold pressure that caused the damage. Sure it was part of
the shrapnel but a metal ammo box would have done the same thing.
On 5/5/2013 9:56 PM, HeyBub wrote:
> woodchucker wrote:
>> Hey,
>> I bought a compressor from a garage sale yesterday.
>> Paid $20, seems to be between 13 and 20 gallons.
>> What I wanted was an oil type compressor that uses a belt.
>>
>> I could not take the oil less type of noise anymore.
>>
>> I thought I was taking a risk, pretty rusted on the outside, but
>> didn't appear deeply rusted. I shook the thing did not hear water in
>> it (WRONG)...
>>
>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>> rusted water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>
>>
>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank? Where I used to live we
>> had a scales air compressor place nearby but they closed... I don't
>> find any of them around any more.. not close by.
>> The rust on the outside is all superficial and can be sanded and
>> painted ... I need to get into the tank with a 3/4 square end and
>> see.. Anyone have some real info on how to treat this?
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> From Wikipedia:
>
> --- begin quote
> Phosphoric acid may be used as a "rust converter", by direct application to
> rusted iron, steel tools, or surfaces. The phosphoric acid converts
> reddish-brown iron(III) oxide, Fe2O3 (rust) to black ferric phosphate,
> FePO4.
>
> "Rust converter" is sometimes a greenish liquid suitable for dipping (in the
> same sort of acid bath as is used for pickling metal), but it is more often
> formulated as a gel, commonly called "naval jelly". It is sometimes sold
> under other names, such as "rust remover" or "rust killer". As a thick gel,
> it may be applied to sloping, vertical, or even overhead surfaces.
>
> After treatment, the black ferric-phosphate coating can be scrubbed off,
> leaving a fresh metal surface. Multiple applications of phosphoric acid may
> be required to remove all rust. The black phosphate coating can also be left
> in place, where it will provide moderate further corrosion resistance (such
> protection is also provided by the superficially similar Parkerizing and
> blued electrochemical conversion coating processes).
>
> --- end quote
>
> This is how "black pipe" (used for natural gas distribution) is created.
>
>
>
> And, from one blogger:
>
> "Look for it as Metal Prep oluton. It's available at any lumber yard, borg,
> or hardware store in quarts and gallons in plastic bottles. I use Jasco out
> of blind brand loyalty but it' a good consistant product. It has tuff in it
> that makes it work better than the plain acid. I dilute it 10 to 1 in a 5
> gallon pail. When the blue color fades the acid has pooped out so add more.
>
> "It's sewer safe when exhausted. Or since the spent solution is mostly iron
> phosphate it makes good fertilizer. Run it through a proportioning squirt
> nozzle and water your flowers."
>
>
So if I can't scrub it off, will it still work?
--
Jeff
On 5/5/2013 8:02 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "woodchucker" wrote:
>
>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>> rusted
>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
> ------------------------------------------------
> So what else is knew?
> ------------------------------------------------
>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
> --------------------------------------------------
> So the owner is a little forgetful.
>
> Question: What is the condition of the relief valve?
> ----------------------------------------------------
>> So I worry, I wanted to bring this into the basement. My current one
>> wakes me up at night when I forget to shut it...
> ------------------------------------------------------
> IMHO, only a fool would keep and air compressor in the basement
> or other confined space.
That might be true, guess I am that fool.
So I guess in your mind my garage might be better. In my mind neither is
great. But because it is in the basement it gets taken care of way more
than it would in the garage.
>
> When it comes to pressurized vessels around your home, assume
> they are going to explode and plan accordingly.
>
> Lew
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Jeff
On 5/5/2013 9:51 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
> woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>
> When there's a lot of water in the tank, "hadn't been used for years" is waaaaay better than
> "used it every week".
>
> Water, by itself, doesn't cause rust. For iron to rust, two things are necessary: water and
> oxygen. Once all the oxygen in the tank has been converted to iron oxide, there will be no
> further rusting.
>
> Case in point: hydronic (hot water) heating systems -- such as the one in my house --
> typically have cast-iron boilers, and many (mine included) have cast-iron radiators as well.
> Water normally sits in these systems for *decades* without any damage to the cast-iron
> components. Yes, there's some rusting internally, but not much. Once the small amount of
> dissolved oxygen is used up, the rusting process stops.
>
Makes sense.
--
Jeff
On 5/5/2013 8:05 PM, Sonny wrote:
> Well, it may have had a pint/quart of water, but the rusting factor would depend on the amount of oxygen reacting with the iron to produce a quantity of rust. In a closed container, the rust may be much less than if contents were exposed to more open air.
>
> Not just open it, but can you remove the whole petcock assembly, without breaking it? What size hole is in the tank, there, 1/2", 3/4"? If you can remove the assembly, rinse out the tank, well, then rinse with denatured alcohol. Allow to dry, as best it can, before reinstalling the petcock.
>
> If I had a questionably badly rusted tank, I might entertain the idea of rinsing/sloshing the bottom of the tank with muratic acid, to see what all might be washed out. Rinse with water, afterwards. I would think the very bottom is rusted the most, if significantly.
>
> Sonny
>
Sounds like that might not be a bad idea. Gotta see if I can get a 3/4
square drive to remove the 2 plugs, it would allow me to ,
the petcock I usually replace with 90 street and galv pipe to a ball valve.
Don't understand petcocks.. pain the ass and the ball is worth the money
to quickly release the water.
how do I neutralize the muriatic acid in the tank after, just water or
baking soda... Will that clean off most of the loose rust?
--
Jeff
woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
When there's a lot of water in the tank, "hadn't been used for years" is waaaaay better than
"used it every week".
Water, by itself, doesn't cause rust. For iron to rust, two things are necessary: water and
oxygen. Once all the oxygen in the tank has been converted to iron oxide, there will be no
further rusting.
Case in point: hydronic (hot water) heating systems -- such as the one in my house --
typically have cast-iron boilers, and many (mine included) have cast-iron radiators as well.
Water normally sits in these systems for *decades* without any damage to the cast-iron
components. Yes, there's some rusting internally, but not much. Once the small amount of
dissolved oxygen is used up, the rusting process stops.
Keith Nuttle <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> I would believe that a cast iron boiler is several times thicker that an
> air compressor tank. I am sure the radiator is.
>
Indeed it is. But the water sits there longer, too. The point remains that once the oxygen in the
system is used up, no further oxidation (read: rusting) can take place unless fresh oxygen is
introduced.
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in news:51872d87$0$28468$c3e8da3
[email protected]:
>
>
>
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>>> pressure
>>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>>
>>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>>
>>> Even your hot water tank has one.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>
>> I hope you're joking.
>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the source.
For someone who claims to be an engineer, you have some odd notions. Those pressure
cookers were ruptured by exploding gunpowder. Do you *really* think that the pressure
developed by an air compressor (9 to 10 atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly
comparable to the pressure developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
Do you *really* think that a bursting compressor tank will create the same kind of
"shrapnel" as a pressure cooker that was packed with ball bearings and nails?
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>> And not
>> all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made from
>> much
>> lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
> ------------------------------------------------
> Like mine which is at least 25 years old.
Mine is closer to 80 years old. Belonged to my grandmother and still works
fine. I've replaced the seals and pressure safety gasket a few times in the
fifty years I've owned it, along with the regulator, which was lost in a
move, about 15 years ago.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> Do you *really*
>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>
> I found this:
>
> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
> centimeters of gas,"
>
> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>
Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not the
case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and a
kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
On 5/11/2013 1:33 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 10:15:00 -0400, Keith Nuttle
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 5/11/2013 1:16 AM, Leon wrote:
>>> It looked when the bombs went off that most of the blast went up. And not
>>> all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made from much
>>> lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
>>
>> Based on the number of leg and lower torso injuries it looks the bombs
>> were designed to send shrapnel into the horizontal directions.
>>
>> This is what makes these guys actions so deplorable. It appears they
>> design the bombs to not kill people but to destroy their legs, which the
>> runners were very proud of and dependent for their enjoyment.
>
> I *highly* doubt it was "designed" to do anything but make a bang and
> kill people. The lid obviously stayed intact (as I would have
> expected) so much of the energy would be naturally out the side. I
> doubt that this was in any way a "design" goal. I'm sure a compressor
> tank would have been even better.
>
>
>
The lid was found about 200' down the street on top of about a 7 story
building. The lid blew off and way up high.
On Sat, 11 May 2013 10:15:00 -0400, Keith Nuttle
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 5/11/2013 1:16 AM, Leon wrote:
>> It looked when the bombs went off that most of the blast went up. And not
>> all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made from much
>> lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
>
>Based on the number of leg and lower torso injuries it looks the bombs
>were designed to send shrapnel into the horizontal directions.
>
>This is what makes these guys actions so deplorable. It appears they
>design the bombs to not kill people but to destroy their legs, which the
>runners were very proud of and dependent for their enjoyment.
I *highly* doubt it was "designed" to do anything but make a bang and
kill people. The lid obviously stayed intact (as I would have
expected) so much of the energy would be naturally out the side. I
doubt that this was in any way a "design" goal. I'm sure a compressor
tank would have been even better.
On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:05:31 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Well, it may have had a pint/quart of water, but the rusting factor would depend on the amount of oxygen reacting with the iron to produce a quantity of rust. In a closed container, the rust may be much less than if contents were exposed to more open air.
>
>Not just open it, but can you remove the whole petcock assembly, without breaking it? What size hole is in the tank, there, 1/2", 3/4"? If you can remove the assembly, rinse out the tank, well, then rinse with denatured alcohol. Allow to dry, as best it can, before reinstalling the petcock.
>
>If I had a questionably badly rusted tank, I might entertain the idea of rinsing/sloshing the bottom of the tank with muratic acid, to see what all might be washed out. Rinse with water, afterwards. I would think the very bottom is rusted the most, if significantly.
>
>Sonny
Buy , rent, or borrow an "inspection camera" - remove a fitting and
poke the camra in to see what it looks like. If you can't tell, rince
the tank out untill it is clean and try again. Any significant pitting
will show up.
On Sunday, May 5, 2013 8:57:31 PM UTC-5, woodchucker wrote:
> Sounds like that might not be a bad idea. how do I neutralize the muria=
tic acid in the tank after, just water or baking soda...=20
Flush with water. It shouldn't take much acid (1-2 cups) to rinse/slosh th=
e bottom of the tank, where there would likely be the most rust. Concrete =
is cleaned with muratic acid and simply rinsed with water. The old saying =
is to add acid to water, to prevent a splattering reaction when mixing the =
two. In this situation, adding water to the acid (to neutralize it), insid=
e the tank, shouldn't be a problem, plus it would be difficult to pour out =
the acid, first, into a safe container without having it pour irradically f=
rom the petcock hole. Further, pour the mix into a 5 gal bucket of water, =
to further dilute it.
> Will that clean off most of the loose rust?=20
Maybe/yes, to some extent. I've used it to assist in removing rust on stuf=
f at home(shop) and used it on (our past) boat dock surfaces. Since you ca=
n't readily see inside the tank, we don't know if there is significant rust=
in there, or not. Muratic acid is more readily available, I think, and wi=
ll help loosen at least some rust without having to scrub, since you can't =
readily scrub the inside. Any potential loose rust may block the petcock, =
in the future, so removing the most you can is preferrable. Using acid is =
the easiest way, IMO, hence my entertaining the idea of using the acid as a=
"rinse" or possible (assistant) rust remover.
Summer jobs, during college days, I worked on a dredge boat/barge along the=
Gulf coast. There were times when we'd clean parts of the deck for repain=
ting. An acid was used to help remove (or treat?) the rusted areas. I don=
't recall what acid was used. We'd slosh it on, do some minimal scrubbing,=
then rinse with water. On tough or deeply rusted areas, we'd use a grinde=
r to remove the rust, best we could. Apparently the acid "treatment" did s=
ome kind of good.
Muratic acid is pretty potent. If spilled on the outside of the tank, it w=
ill likely peel the paint off, fast.
Sonny
On Sun, 5 May 2013 21:11:50 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
>> I hope you're joking.
>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the source.
Those pressure cookers were shrapnel accelerated by explosive. That's
considerably different than a compressor container giving way to air
pressure. Almost invariably, the compressor will burst at a pinhole or
maybe a little larger area.
On Sun, 05 May 2013 23:19:01 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/5/13 11:11 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>
>>>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>>>> pressure
>>>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>>>
>>>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>>>
>>>> Even your hot water tank has one.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>
>>> I hope you're joking.
>>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the source.
>>
>> Lew
>>
>
>That's kind of the point. There is no shrapnel when an air tank "explodes."
>Why do I keep putting explodes in quotation marks? Because of the very
>misconception you have and others are having. The energy from a bursting
>air tank is no where near enough to cause shrapnel.
>
>The energy caused by gun powder is many multitudes higher than an air
>tank. The velocity of the explosion is also many magnitudes higher.
>
>Oh, and last time I looked at air compressors, non of the tanks were
>packed with ball bearings, either. sheesh.
OK, when it comes to air receiver failures that cause damage or
injury, they are virtually NEVER rust related. They are almost always
brittle fractures - related to a bad weld or a fatigue crack - most
often a fatigue crack related to a bad weld. This caused a
catastrophic failure and instand decompression - which DOES cause
serious structural damage and can cause grievious injuries.
Rust failure is virtually ALWAYS a gradual failure, which causes
little if any damage or injury in the average small air receiver
On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most rusted
> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>
>
> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
I guess I don't understand what's to save.
Does it still compress air?
You drained out the water.
Put a filter on the output and use it.
I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most rusted
>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>
>>>
>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>>
>>
>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
>> Does it still compress air?
>> You drained out the water.
>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>>
>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
>> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>>
>>
> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>
I would believe that the question is not how much water or how much
rust, but what is the remaining thickness of the metal making up the
tank. If the tank has sit for years has the bottom nearly rusted through?
If it rusted and significantly decreased the thickness of the tank wall
is it general or is it such that when it fails it will pin hole and leak
slowly or fail catastrophically.
I have never seen a tank fail, but.................
On 5/5/13 4:21 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>>>> rusted
>>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
>>> Does it still compress air?
>>> You drained out the water.
>>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>>>
>>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
>>> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>>>
>>>
>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>>
> I also remember that there used to be an additive to tanks to protect them.
> I knew what it was 30 years ago.
>
> Might be too late, but anyone know what the name is.
>
I'm going on 13 years with my current compressor and it work like
the day I bought it. I think i remember letting a few ounces of water
out of it several years ago. Yes, it was brown.
To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
spraying using the compressor.
I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Thu, 09 May 2013 12:08:01 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/9/13 12:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:43:02 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/7/13 7:56 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>>>>> pressure
>>>>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even your hot water tank has one.
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I hope you're joking.
>>>>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the
>>>>> source.
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That's kind of the point. There is no shrapnel when an air tank
>>>>> "explodes."
>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What do you call the parts of the vessel that are created when
>>>> a vessel bursts?
>>>>
>>>> Chopped liver?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Shrapnel: Fragments of a bomb, shell, or other object thrown out by an
>>> explosion.
>>> When an air tank fails from over pressure there is not enough energy to
>>> create shrapnel.
>>> Could a part come flying off, perhaps. But that is certainly a very
>>> loose interpretation of the accepted definition when talking about true
>>> explosions.
>>>
>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why do I keep putting explodes in quotation marks? Because of the
>>>>> very
>>>>> misconception you have and others are having. The energy from a
>>>>> bursting
>>>>> air tank is no where near enough to cause shrapnel.
>>>>>
>>>>> The energy caused by gun powder is many multitudes higher than an
>>>>> air
>>>>> tank. The velocity of the explosion is also many magnitudes higher.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, and last time I looked at air compressors, non of the tanks were
>>>>> packed with ball bearings, either. sheesh.
>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You seem to have difficulty understanding what is written.
>>>>
>>>> I made no mention of gun powder, ball bearings or any other items of
>>>> IBS
>>>> (Intellectual Bull Shit) you attempt to introduce to confuse the
>>>> issue.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Quit bullshitting and digging the hole deeper. We're talking air tanks
>>> failing from over pressurization and you're the one who brought up the
>>> marathon bombers' pressure cooker bombs. YOU are the one attempting to
>>> confuse the issue by introducing a BOMB into a conversation about air
>>> compressors.
>>>
>>>
>>>> My comment simply stated that the size of the vessel is totally
>>>> independent of it's ability to raise the havoc created if it were to
>>>> burst in an area where people were assembled.
>>>>
>>>> What causes a vessel to exceed design specifications and fail
>>>> by bursting is a totally different discussion.
>>>>
>>>> What remains relevant is that if a vessel bursts in an occupied area,
>>>> chances are pretty good that somebody is going to get hurt.
>>>>
>>>> Nothing more, nothing less.
>>>>
>>>> Lew
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can pop a balloon ("vessel burst") in an occupied area? Who gets hurt?
>>>
>>> There has to be enough energy to create the shrapnel. Even without
>>> shrapnel, there would have to be a enough energy released to create a
>>> pressure wave for anyone to be injured seriously. How do you not get that?
>>>
>>> An air compressor "vessel" "bursting" has a tiny fraction of the energy
>>> of a bomb. Aren't you the engineer, here? How do you not see that?
>> Perhaps, but IF it fails catastrophically - like a brittle fracture
>> ( and they DO happen very occaisionally) they ARE very dangerous.
>>
>> A hydrogen embrittled 20 gallon tank, 1/8" thick, at 200 psi could do
>> greivous harm to anyone within 20 feet.or more if struck, by say, a
>> falling hammer or other flying debris.
>>
>
>But where is the evidence of this happening. I'm not talking about
>damage or injury. I'm talking shrapnel, because that's what was brought
>up early in this discussion.
>
>I remember the mythbusters episode where they pumped up an air talk way
>beyond normal operating pressure, having disabled the relief valve. They
>proceeded to ram all kinds of stuff into it, even shooting it with a gun
>and could not get it to "explode."
Years ago, when I was service manager at the Toyota dealership,
there was an article in one of the trade magazines - Canadian Service
Station Management or something like that, which showed the results of
an air compressor tank explosion. The tank had lap joints and the
welding process caused an HAZ (Heat affected zone) along that end cap
joint that met with the HAZ from where the mounting foot was welded on
and vibration from running with the legs on concrete floor without
rubber isolation fatiqued the joint. somebody dropped a wheel or
something that hit the tank and set it off. Severe damage to the
adjoining wall and injuries to people in the shop from flying bits.
Also, a small compressor manufacturer in Minnesota? back in the
sixties or seventies had several tank explosions that caused personal
injury when they let go, including one user with serious head and
facial injuries when the exploding tank fractured the drive pully and
flung it at the poor guy's head. Several hundred of those tanks
apparently failed with varying injuries reported..
In both cases, "shrapnel" was involved.
It is not common - but it IS the uncommon that is the most dangerous
since it is totally unexpected.
On 5/5/13 6:26 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/5/2013 6:45 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 5/5/13 4:21 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>>>>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>>>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>>>>>> rusted
>>>>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
>>>>> Does it still compress air?
>>>>> You drained out the water.
>>>>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
>>>>> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>>>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>>>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>>>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>>>>
>>> I also remember that there used to be an additive to tanks to protect
>>> them.
>>> I knew what it was 30 years ago.
>>>
>>> Might be too late, but anyone know what the name is.
>>>
>>
>> I'm going on 13 years with my current compressor and it work like
>> the day I bought it. I think i remember letting a few ounces of water
>> out of it several years ago. Yes, it was brown.
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
>> out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
>> spraying using the compressor.
>>
>> I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
>>
>>
> Years ago I read about a tank having a catastrophic failure. It didn't
> just pinhole, it blew from rust.
>
> So I worry, I wanted to bring this into the basement. My current one
> wakes me up at night when I forget to shut it...
>
> This one will be quieter if I forget. But I need to know it will be ok.
I keep hearing about it, too, but it's always a friend of a friend of an
uncle's boss.
And I hear about it being from rust, too, but it's never confirmed.
There are always other factors responsible when investigations are done.
I've seen articles about talks in big shops "exploding" and causing
damage and injuries.
These are usually big, big tanks and the injured were standing nearby
and got cut by metal shards still attached to the tank.
13-20 gallon tank isn't going to "explode" with enough force to cause
the kind of damage you read about. BTW, when the pressure in mine gets
to high, the pressure release valve lets out a bunch of air. If you're
doesn't have one of those, it's probably a good idea to instal one.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:33:16 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/6/13 4:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't
>>>> even come close to
>>>> developing that kind of pressure.
>>>
>>> A pressure cooker can't either.
>>>
>>
>> Gun power can.
>
> Only if contained. Gun powder a low explosive (the shock wave is
> sub-sonic in the powder) and will not explode unless it's contained. A
> pressure cooker isn't the best pressure vessel for this sort of thing,
> either.
>
> Although this wasn't gun powder, either. It was flash powder
> (fireworks), which has a higher burn rate (usually contains metal
> powder).
Yep, and also depends upon the sensitivity of the explosive on whether it
needs a primary explosion (blasting cap) to activate, otherwise it just
burns. Cooked my meals, by boiling water for LRP rations, with explosives
(C4) for the better part of 7 months, using a thumb sized chunk, in a
C-ration peach can "stove" vented with holes made by a church key.
--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)
On Thu, 09 May 2013 21:45:13 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>Yes, Uranium bombs are so trivial a test wasn't needed. In fact, the
>only country that failed on its first attempt was N. Korea.
Actually, I believe the first atomic bomb test was in New Mexico.
On Fri, 10 May 2013 11:05:31 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 21:45:13 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>Yes, Uranium bombs are so trivial a test wasn't needed. In fact, the
>>only country that failed on its first attempt was N. Korea.
>
>Actually, I believe the first atomic bomb test was in New Mexico.
That was a Plutonium bomb. A test was needed to prove the implosion
technique needed to make the PT supercritical. Uranium only takes the
equivalent of a cannon barrel and a couple of shells. The first
"test" of the Uranium bomb was over Nagasaki. It worked.
On 5/8/2013 10:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:46 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>
> One thing I was wondering, did these Boston bombers make a practice
> bomb first anywhere? Was there ever any mention of that? After all, if
> someone intends to go out with their homemade bomb to do some damage,
> they usually want to know if the damned thing will work before they
> head out.
>
yes. there was a newspaper article that the fbi was questioning some
people in reference to an explosion in the woods somewhere around boston.
On 5/9/13 12:05 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:46 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>
> One thing I was wondering, did these Boston bombers make a practice
> bomb first anywhere? Was there ever any mention of that? After all, if
> someone intends to go out with their homemade bomb to do some damage,
> they usually want to know if the damned thing will work before they
> head out.
>
Short answer, who knows?
Long answer, these guys get training on this stuff from very scary
people. The more they investigate this, I suspect it will show they had
overseas al qaeda training.
That said, there have been many attempts in the US that have failed.
These don't make the headlines and when they do, it's not for long.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:46 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>>Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>>and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>>to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>
>One thing I was wondering, did these Boston bombers make a practice
>bomb first anywhere? Was there ever any mention of that? After all, if
>someone intends to go out with their homemade bomb to do some damage,
>they usually want to know if the damned thing will work before they
>head out.
Usually, perhaps. A notable exception was the uranium-based atomic bomb
used at Hiroshima. There was no test bomb. The 1st atomic explosion WAS
a test of the plutonium-based bomb like the one used at Nagasaki.
--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)
Larry W. - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org
On Thu, 09 May 2013 11:51:24 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:
> That said, there have been many attempts in the US that have failed.
> These don't make the headlines and when they do, it's not for long.
It's also said that a lot of the foiled plots were instigated by the
FBI :-). Wonder how many of the fanatics would have done anything but
bitch if they hadn't be pushed?
OTOH, if the FBI hadn't pushed them, someone else might have!
--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.
On 5/9/13 7:26 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 11:51:24 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:
>
>> That said, there have been many attempts in the US that have failed.
>> These don't make the headlines and when they do, it's not for long.
>
> It's also said that a lot of the foiled plots were instigated by the
> FBI :-). Wonder how many of the fanatics would have done anything but
> bitch if they hadn't be pushed?
>
Because that a good enough excuse.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Thu, 9 May 2013 21:47:00 +0000 (UTC),
[email protected] (Larry W) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:46 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>>>Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>>>and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>>>to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>>
>>One thing I was wondering, did these Boston bombers make a practice
>>bomb first anywhere? Was there ever any mention of that? After all, if
>>someone intends to go out with their homemade bomb to do some damage,
>>they usually want to know if the damned thing will work before they
>>head out.
>
>Usually, perhaps. A notable exception was the uranium-based atomic bomb
>used at Hiroshima. There was no test bomb. The 1st atomic explosion WAS
>a test of the plutonium-based bomb like the one used at Nagasaki.
Yes, Uranium bombs are so trivial a test wasn't needed. In fact, the
only country that failed on its first attempt was N. Korea.
On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:46 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
One thing I was wondering, did these Boston bombers make a practice
bomb first anywhere? Was there ever any mention of that? After all, if
someone intends to go out with their homemade bomb to do some damage,
they usually want to know if the damned thing will work before they
head out.
On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:46 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>>
>>
>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>
>Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
>for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
No, it needs containment or the power will just "flash". Again, it's a
low-explosive.
>Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
woodchucker wrote:
>
>
> So what chance do I have of saving this tank? Where I used to live we
> had a scales air compressor place nearby but they closed... I don't
> find any of them around any more.. not close by.
> The rust on the outside is all superficial and can be sanded and
> painted ... I need to get into the tank with a 3/4 square end and
> see.. Anyone have some real info on how to treat this?
>
You can buy sealers that you can pour into the tank after you dry it out
(throw some rocks in it, shake them around good first). Look for gas tank
sealers. A compressor tank will go for years like that though. Hard to say
without seeing the tank, knocking on it to see how the steel sounds, etc.,
but just because it poured out rusty water is not cause to get too worried
just yet.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
woodchucker wrote:
> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
You'd probably be surprised at how many comressors never get drained, and
sit with water in them for years. Fire it up and use it. You'll find out
if it leaks.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
woodchucker wrote:
> Years ago I read about a tank having a catastrophic failure. It didn't
> just pinhole, it blew from rust.
>
> So I worry, I wanted to bring this into the basement. My current one
> wakes me up at night when I forget to shut it...
>
If that really did happen, it's the rare event. Usually when the tank
rusts, it rusts through in pinholes.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Doug Winterburn wrote:
> Don't know about that stuff, but I put the HF automatic compressor
> drain on mine:
>
> <http://www.harborfreight.com/catalogsearch/result?q=automatic+compressor+drain>
>
> I did have to fart around and replace the plastic tubing with copper
> tubing. It's been working fine for about 12 years.
I tried two of those damned things and finally went back to an elbow, a
valve and a length of pipe. I too had replaced the cheap hose with brake
line (in my case), but the damned valves both failed after only a couple or
a few weeks.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"-MIKE-" <
> There are always other factors responsible when
> investigations are done.
> I've seen articles about tanks in big shops
> "exploding" and causing
> damage and injuries.
> These are usually big, big tanks and the injured
> were standing nearby
> and got cut by metal shards still attached to
> the tank.
xxx
This sounds like an acetylene generator incident.
They were
common many years ago.
xxx
>
> 13-20 gallon tank isn't going to "explode" with
> enough force to cause
> the kind of damage you read about. BTW, when the
> pressure in mine gets
> to high, the pressure release valve lets out a
> bunch of air. If you're
> doesn't have one of those, it's probably a good
> idea to instal one.
>
>
> --
>
> -MIKE-
>
On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:33:16 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/6/13 4:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>>
>>> Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't even come close to
>>> developing that kind of pressure.
>>
>> A pressure cooker can't either.
>>
>
>Gun power can.
Only if contained. Gun powder a low explosive (the shock wave is
sub-sonic in the powder) and will not explode unless it's contained. A
pressure cooker isn't the best pressure vessel for this sort of thing,
either.
Although this wasn't gun powder, either. It was flash powder
(fireworks), which has a higher burn rate (usually contains metal
powder).
On 5/6/13 6:43 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:33:16 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/6/13 4:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air
>>>> compressor
>>>> can't even come close to
>>>> developing that kind of pressure.
>>> A pressure cooker can't either.
>>>
>>
>> Gun power can.
>
> Only if contained. Gun powder a low explosive (the shock wave is
> sub-sonic in the powder) and will not explode unless it's contained. A
> pressure cooker isn't the best pressure vessel for this sort of thing,
> either.
>
> Although this wasn't gun powder, either. It was flash powder
> (fireworks), which has a higher burn rate (usually contains metal
> powder).
>
Ok, change everything I wrote to include "flash" powder.
The point is, an air tank doesn't "explode" sending shrapnel and...
A pressure cooker packed with an explosive plus ball bearings... does...
very well.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Mon, 6 May 2013 22:29:03 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 18:20:30 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:14:58 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote in news:km8ne6$4hj$1
>>>@speranza.aioe.org:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you *really*
>>>>>>> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
>>>>>>> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
>>>>>>> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I found this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
>>>>>> centimeters of gas,"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
>>>>>> pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Typical pressure cooker is about 5 liters. It would take 5000 / 270 = 18.5 grams of black
>>>>>powder to produce 5 l of gas at 1 atm pressure -- so developing a pressure of, say, 25
>>>>>atmospheres would require 25 times that much: 463 g, or just over a pound.
>>>>>
>>>>>And that's assuming there's nothing else in the pressure cooker, which we know is not
>the
>>>>>case. Suppose the interior volume was reduced by half, by the ball bearings and nails
>>>>>these guys added. In that case, we're talking a free volume of only about 2.5 liters, and
>a
>>>>>kilogram of powder would generate pressure well over 100 atmospheres.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>>
>>>Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't even come close
>to
>>>developing that kind of pressure.
>>
>> A pressure cooker can't either.
>
>Did this discussion ruffle your hair at all?
Of course not. My hair comes pre-ruffled. You're not going to change
it.
On 5/5/2013 9:51 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
> woodchucker <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>
> When there's a lot of water in the tank, "hadn't been used for years" is waaaaay better than
> "used it every week".
>
> Water, by itself, doesn't cause rust. For iron to rust, two things are necessary: water and
> oxygen. Once all the oxygen in the tank has been converted to iron oxide, there will be no
> further rusting.
>
> Case in point: hydronic (hot water) heating systems -- such as the one in my house --
> typically have cast-iron boilers, and many (mine included) have cast-iron radiators as well.
> Water normally sits in these systems for *decades* without any damage to the cast-iron
> components. Yes, there's some rusting internally, but not much. Once the small amount of
> dissolved oxygen is used up, the rusting process stops.
>
I would believe that a cast iron boiler is several times thicker that an
air compressor tank. I am sure the radiator is.
On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:45:26 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:
> To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
> out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
> spraying using the compressor.
>
> I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
Well, it might just be the normal corporate CYA, but every compressor
manual I've seen says to drain on a regular basis - like every time if
you use it infrequently.
--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.
On 5/5/13 9:38 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:45:26 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:
>
>> To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
>> out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
>> spraying using the compressor.
>>
>> I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
>
> Well, it might just be the normal corporate CYA, but every compressor
> manual I've seen says to drain on a regular basis - like every time if
> you use it infrequently.
>
As I wrote, you don't drain it because of some perceived danger or rust
build up.
You drain it to improve performance of the pneumatic tools using the
compressed air.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 5/5/13 10:24 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "-MIKE-" <
>
>> 13-20 gallon tank isn't going to "explode" with enough force to
>> cause
>> the kind of damage you read about. BTW, when the pressure in mine
>> gets
>> to high, the pressure release valve lets out a bunch of air. If
>> you're
>> doesn't have one of those, it's probably a good idea to instal one.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
> pressure
> cookers in Boston were/are?
>
> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>
> Even your hot water tank has one.
>
> Lew
>
I hope you're joking.
There was a lot more than air in those things.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
"CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "woodchucker" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> On 5/9/2013 9:52 AM, Leon wrote:
>> On 5/9/2013 12:11 AM, CW wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "-MIKE-" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you
>>>> hear, at 15 lbs.
>>>
>>> Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a decent vessel
>>> for a bomb and not a functional part of the explosion mechanism.
>>>
>>> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how it works
>>> and how to make your own with a simple google search. But I don't care
>>> to start a homeland security file on myself, so I'll pass. :-)
>>> =================================================================
>>> The pressure cooker is a needed part of the bomb. The pressure relief
>>> valve is not an issue. The pressure build up is too fast for it to vent
>>> it fast enough to make any difference. You could put the same components
>>> in a paper bag instead of the pressure cooker and all you would get is a
>>> fire.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I believe the vessel would have been better had it been stronger than a
>> pressure cooker. Like a circuit breaker that protects the wiring in a
>> house the 15 lb relief valve is to protect the cooker. I highly suspect
>> that the lid popped off long before the potential was reached with the
>> powder burn.
> Agreed.
> =================================================================================================
> If that was the case, it would amount to a shaped charge, pointed
> straight up. It would be hell on ceilings and it would make it rain ball
> bearings. The pressure build would be so fast that, by time the locking
> lugs yielded, the pressure would be so high that the whole thing would
> fracture. Consider to that pressure cookers are cast. Cast aluminum is
> quite brittle. Chances are high that the lid let go before the rest of
> it. Maybe a pico second before.
It looked when the bombs went off that most of the blast went up. And not
all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made from much
lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
http://www1.macys.com/shop/product/fagor-elite-pressure-cooker-4-qt?ID=593479&cm_mmc=Google_DMA_Home_Electrics_PLA-_-PLA+Home+Brands+-+Electrics_PLA+-+Electrics+-+Fagor+-+2-_-29289153716_-_-_mkwid_K6XTOYMJ_29289153716%7C-%7CK6XTOYMJ
On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:51:23 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>They didn't need such "training" (though that's not to say that it
>didn't happen). Everything needed to make such a bomb is on the WWW.
>Terrorist-U is now an online curriculum.
Sure, everything is there as per instructions, but it was me, I'd be
testing. I'd want to see if my homemade bomb goes 'pop' or goes
'BOOM'.
If terrorism is what I was aiming for, I'd want to see how small a
bomb I could make that still had devastating effects. Etcetera. Think
Mike called it though, they could have had practical training
elsewhere.
"Leon" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 5/11/2013 9:15 AM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
> On 5/11/2013 1:16 AM, Leon wrote:
>> It looked when the bombs went off that most of the blast went up. And
>> not
>> all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made from much
>> lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
>
> Based on the number of leg and lower torso injuries it looks the bombs
> were designed to send shrapnel into the horizontal directions.
>
> This is what makes these guys actions so deplorable. It appears they
> design the bombs to not kill people but to destroy their legs, which the
> runners were very proud of and dependent for their enjoyment.
Well that is what happened but the runners do not enjoy their legs any
more that any one else that walks around. I don't know about you but I
am not a runner and am dependent on my legs for much of my enjoyment.
==================================================================================
After 15 months in a wheelchair, I realize how important they are.
On 5/11/2013 1:16 AM, Leon wrote:
> It looked when the bombs went off that most of the blast went up. And not
> all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made from much
> lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
Based on the number of leg and lower torso injuries it looks the bombs
were designed to send shrapnel into the horizontal directions.
This is what makes these guys actions so deplorable. It appears they
design the bombs to not kill people but to destroy their legs, which the
runners were very proud of and dependent for their enjoyment.
On 5/11/13 12:16 AM, Leon wrote:
> "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "woodchucker" wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> On 5/9/2013 9:52 AM, Leon wrote:
>>> On 5/9/2013 12:11 AM, CW wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "-MIKE-" wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>> On 5/6/13 2:37 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that
>>>>> hissing you hear, at 15 lbs.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming the thing wasn't plugged in, it's probably just a
>>>> decent vessel for a bomb and not a functional part of the
>>>> explosion mechanism.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, one could easily find out exactly what, why, and how
>>>> it works and how to make your own with a simple google search.
>>>> But I don't care to start a homeland security file on myself,
>>>> so I'll pass. :-)
>>>> =================================================================
>>>>
>>>>
The pressure cooker is a needed part of the bomb. The pressure relief
>>>> valve is not an issue. The pressure build up is too fast for it
>>>> to vent it fast enough to make any difference. You could put
>>>> the same components in a paper bag instead of the pressure
>>>> cooker and all you would get is a fire.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I believe the vessel would have been better had it been stronger
>>> than a pressure cooker. Like a circuit breaker that protects the
>>> wiring in a house the 15 lb relief valve is to protect the
>>> cooker. I highly suspect that the lid popped off long before the
>>> potential was reached with the powder burn.
>> Agreed.
>> =================================================================================================
>>
>>
If that was the case, it would amount to a shaped charge, pointed
>> straight up. It would be hell on ceilings and it would make it rain
>> ball bearings. The pressure build would be so fast that, by time
>> the locking lugs yielded, the pressure would be so high that the
>> whole thing would fracture. Consider to that pressure cookers are
>> cast. Cast aluminum is quite brittle. Chances are high that the lid
>> let go before the rest of it. Maybe a pico second before.
>
>
> It looked when the bombs went off that most of the blast went up.
> And not all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made
> from much lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
> http://www1.macys.com/shop/product/fagor-elite-
>
As to the context of our discussion, a 13-20 gallon compressor bursting
from over pressurization isn't going to take off any legs or arms, let
alone kill anyone.
These "pressure cooker bombs" seemed to do quite a good job at it,
however.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:23:34 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/6/13 6:43 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:33:16 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/6/13 4:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Assuming that it didn't rupture first.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air
>>>>> compressor
>>>>> can't even come close to
>>>>> developing that kind of pressure.
>>>> A pressure cooker can't either.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gun power can.
>>
>> Only if contained. Gun powder a low explosive (the shock wave is
>> sub-sonic in the powder) and will not explode unless it's contained. A
>> pressure cooker isn't the best pressure vessel for this sort of thing,
>> either.
>>
>> Although this wasn't gun powder, either. It was flash powder
>> (fireworks), which has a higher burn rate (usually contains metal
>> powder).
>>
>
>
>Ok, change everything I wrote to include "flash" powder.
<shrug> TNT doesn't need containment and atomic bombs need
compression to explode, so?
>The point is, an air tank doesn't "explode" sending shrapnel and...
>A pressure cooker packed with an explosive plus ball bearings... does...
>very well.
Not that I said...
On 5/11/2013 9:15 AM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
> On 5/11/2013 1:16 AM, Leon wrote:
>> It looked when the bombs went off that most of the blast went up. And
>> not
>> all pressure cookers are heavy cast aluminum, many are made from much
>> lighter weight rolled stainless steel.
>
> Based on the number of leg and lower torso injuries it looks the bombs
> were designed to send shrapnel into the horizontal directions.
>
> This is what makes these guys actions so deplorable. It appears they
> design the bombs to not kill people but to destroy their legs, which the
> runners were very proud of and dependent for their enjoyment.
Well that is what happened but the runners do not enjoy their legs any
more that any one else that walks around. I don't know about you but I
am not a runner and am dependent on my legs for much of my enjoyment. ;~)
On 5/5/13 11:11 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>>> pressure
>>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>>
>>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>>
>>> Even your hot water tank has one.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>
>> I hope you're joking.
>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the source.
>
> Lew
>
That's kind of the point. There is no shrapnel when an air tank "explodes."
Why do I keep putting explodes in quotation marks? Because of the very
misconception you have and others are having. The energy from a bursting
air tank is no where near enough to cause shrapnel.
The energy caused by gun powder is many multitudes higher than an air
tank. The velocity of the explosion is also many magnitudes higher.
Oh, and last time I looked at air compressors, non of the tanks were
packed with ball bearings, either. sheesh.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Mon, 06 May 2013 11:34:44 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
> Do you *really*
> think that the pressure developed by an air compressor (9 to 10
> atmospheres is typical) is anywhere nearly comparable to the pressure
> developed by igniting gunpowder in a small confined volume?
I found this:
"One gram of blackpowder gives you 718 calories of heat, 270 cubic
centimeters of gas,"
So if we knew how much powder the bombers used and the volume of the
pressure cooker we could come up with a pressure.
--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.
It's very rare for an air compressor tank to violently explode. In cases
where it did happen, usually there was defective construction, the
the compressor had been modified, relief valve stuck closed, etc. A
rusty tank will almost always fail with a pinhole leak or small crack.
I would turn the compressor upside down and tap all over the bottom with
a small hammer. You will hear or feel any thin spots.
You could also have it hydro-tested. This is a requirement for
industrial pressure vessles over a certain size in most states but
perhaps you could find someone willing to test your small compressor the
same way. I think you could do a fair job of testing it yourself by
filling the tank with water and then pressurizing it to about 10% over
it's nominal pressure rating. Personally, I would be satisifed with the
hammer-tap test.
--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.
Larry W. - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org
On 5/7/13 7:56 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>> Don't want to rain on your parade, but how big do you think those
>> pressure
>> cookers in Boston were/are?
>>
>> BTW, a pressure relief valve is a must.
>>
>> Even your hot water tank has one.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>
>> I hope you're joking.
>> There was a lot more than air in those things.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>> Absolutely not kidding, shrapnel is shrapnel regardless of the
>> source.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>
>> That's kind of the point. There is no shrapnel when an air tank
>> "explodes."
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
> What do you call the parts of the vessel that are created when
> a vessel bursts?
>
> Chopped liver?
>
Shrapnel: Fragments of a bomb, shell, or other object thrown out by an
explosion.
When an air tank fails from over pressure there is not enough energy to
create shrapnel.
Could a part come flying off, perhaps. But that is certainly a very
loose interpretation of the accepted definition when talking about true
explosions.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "-MIKE-" wrote:
>
>> Why do I keep putting explodes in quotation marks? Because of the
>> very
>> misconception you have and others are having. The energy from a
>> bursting
>> air tank is no where near enough to cause shrapnel.
>>
>> The energy caused by gun powder is many multitudes higher than an
>> air
>> tank. The velocity of the explosion is also many magnitudes higher.
>>
>> Oh, and last time I looked at air compressors, non of the tanks were
>> packed with ball bearings, either. sheesh.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
> You seem to have difficulty understanding what is written.
>
> I made no mention of gun powder, ball bearings or any other items of
> IBS
> (Intellectual Bull Shit) you attempt to introduce to confuse the
> issue.
>
Quit bullshitting and digging the hole deeper. We're talking air tanks
failing from over pressurization and you're the one who brought up the
marathon bombers' pressure cooker bombs. YOU are the one attempting to
confuse the issue by introducing a BOMB into a conversation about air
compressors.
> My comment simply stated that the size of the vessel is totally
> independent of it's ability to raise the havoc created if it were to
> burst in an area where people were assembled.
>
> What causes a vessel to exceed design specifications and fail
> by bursting is a totally different discussion.
>
> What remains relevant is that if a vessel bursts in an occupied area,
> chances are pretty good that somebody is going to get hurt.
>
> Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> Lew
>
I can pop a balloon ("vessel burst") in an occupied area? Who gets hurt?
There has to be enough energy to create the shrapnel. Even without
shrapnel, there would have to be a enough energy released to create a
pressure wave for anyone to be injured seriously. How do you not get that?
An air compressor "vessel" "bursting" has a tiny fraction of the energy
of a bomb. Aren't you the engineer, here? How do you not see that?
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Sun, 05 May 2013 19:26:45 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/5/2013 6:45 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>> On 5/5/13 4:21 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> On 5/5/2013 5:16 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>> On 5/5/2013 4:56 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
>>>>> On 5/5/13 2:53 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>>>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>>>>>> rusted
>>>>>> water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess I don't understand what's to save.
>>>>> Does it still compress air?
>>>>> You drained out the water.
>>>>> Put a filter on the output and use it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we'd all be surprised by how much water and rust are on the
>>>>> inside of the tanks we use every day. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Well, this tank hadn't been used for years the owner said. I let the
>>>> water out of my tank weekly, how long do you let it sit there.
>>>> I figure that years of sitting means deep rust inside. Based on the
>>>> stink of that water, I'd have to say it's been in there a long time.
>>>>
>>> I also remember that there used to be an additive to tanks to protect
>>> them.
>>> I knew what it was 30 years ago.
>>>
>>> Might be too late, but anyone know what the name is.
>>>
>>
>> I'm going on 13 years with my current compressor and it work like
>> the day I bought it. I think i remember letting a few ounces of water
>> out of it several years ago. Yes, it was brown.
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
>> out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
>> spraying using the compressor.
>>
>> I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
>>
>>
>Years ago I read about a tank having a catastrophic failure. It didn't
>just pinhole, it blew from rust.
>
>So I worry, I wanted to bring this into the basement. My current one
>wakes me up at night when I forget to shut it...
>
>This one will be quieter if I forget. But I need to know it will be ok.
I put mine in the garage and piped air from there. It might be a
little more of a challenge in this house. I'll see in a few weeks
(depends on exactly where walls line up - might be very simple).
On Sun, 05 May 2013 22:08:37 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 5/5/2013 9:56 PM, HeyBub wrote:
>> woodchucker wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>> I bought a compressor from a garage sale yesterday.
>>> Paid $20, seems to be between 13 and 20 gallons.
>>> What I wanted was an oil type compressor that uses a belt.
>>>
>>> I could not take the oil less type of noise anymore.
>>>
>>> I thought I was taking a risk, pretty rusted on the outside, but
>>> didn't appear deeply rusted. I shook the thing did not hear water in
>>> it (WRONG)...
>>>
>>> When I got it home still did not hear water in it...
>>> opened up the petcock after charging it up and holy crap the most
>>> rusted water... and probably a pint to quart of water came out.
>>>
>>>
>>> So what chance do I have of saving this tank? Where I used to live we
>>> had a scales air compressor place nearby but they closed... I don't
>>> find any of them around any more.. not close by.
>>> The rust on the outside is all superficial and can be sanded and
>>> painted ... I need to get into the tank with a 3/4 square end and
>>> see.. Anyone have some real info on how to treat this?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> From Wikipedia:
>>
>> --- begin quote
>> Phosphoric acid may be used as a "rust converter", by direct application to
>> rusted iron, steel tools, or surfaces. The phosphoric acid converts
>> reddish-brown iron(III) oxide, Fe2O3 (rust) to black ferric phosphate,
>> FePO4.
>>
>> "Rust converter" is sometimes a greenish liquid suitable for dipping (in the
>> same sort of acid bath as is used for pickling metal), but it is more often
>> formulated as a gel, commonly called "naval jelly". It is sometimes sold
>> under other names, such as "rust remover" or "rust killer". As a thick gel,
>> it may be applied to sloping, vertical, or even overhead surfaces.
>>
>> After treatment, the black ferric-phosphate coating can be scrubbed off,
>> leaving a fresh metal surface. Multiple applications of phosphoric acid may
>> be required to remove all rust. The black phosphate coating can also be left
>> in place, where it will provide moderate further corrosion resistance (such
>> protection is also provided by the superficially similar Parkerizing and
>> blued electrochemical conversion coating processes).
>>
>> --- end quote
>>
>> This is how "black pipe" (used for natural gas distribution) is created.
>>
>>
>>
>> And, from one blogger:
>>
>> "Look for it as Metal Prep oluton. It's available at any lumber yard, borg,
>> or hardware store in quarts and gallons in plastic bottles. I use Jasco out
>> of blind brand loyalty but it' a good consistant product. It has tuff in it
>> that makes it work better than the plain acid. I dilute it 10 to 1 in a 5
>> gallon pail. When the blue color fades the acid has pooped out so add more.
>>
>> "It's sewer safe when exhausted. Or since the spent solution is mostly iron
>> phosphate it makes good fertilizer. Run it through a proportioning squirt
>> nozzle and water your flowers."
>>
>>
>So if I can't scrub it off, will it still work?
Yes - better than scrubbing it off. The iron phosphate helps prevent
further rusting.
On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:34:29 -0400, Keith Nuttle
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>If it rusted and significantly decreased the thickness of the tank wall
>is it general or is it such that when it fails it will pin hole and leak
>slowly or fail catastrophically.
>
>I have never seen a tank fail, but.................
According to the inspector that does out tanks at work, they pin hole
rather than explode. In MA, tanks have to be inspected every two
years. They use an ultrasonic thing and it gives the wall thickness
and can be done while running.
On 5/5/2013 10:38 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:45:26 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:
>
>> To the best of my knowledge, emptying water is important to keep water
>> out of your pneumatic tools and the finish material you might be
>> spraying using the compressor.
>>
>> I don't think it affects the performance of the compressor.
>
> Well, it might just be the normal corporate CYA, but every compressor
> manual I've seen says to drain on a regular basis - like every time if
> you use it infrequently.
>
That just makes good sense too.
and it is probably not just CYA,
--
Jeff