compressor from garage sale

[krw]

news:km8ne6$4hj$ [e-mail]:

grams of black

is not the

liters, and a

Assuming that it didn't rupture first.

[nailshooter41]

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?

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

[Doug Miller]

[e-mail] wrote in news: [e-mail]:

@speranza.aioe.org:

grams of black

is not the

liters, and a

Well, yes, but the point is that a consumer-grade air compressor can't even come close to developing that kind of pressure.

[Leon]

news:km8ne6$4hj$ [e-mail]:

grams of black

know is not the

liters, and a

Pressure cookers are designed to release pressure, that hissing you hear, at 15 lbs.

[Doug Miller]

Leon wrote in news: [e-mail]:

It's not very hard to remove the safety valve and replace it with a nut and bolt.

[krw]

grams of black

of, say, 25

know is not the

liters, and a

come close to

A pressure cooker can't either.

[krw]

news:km8ne6$4hj$ [e-mail]:

grams of black

of, say, 25

know is not the

2.5 liters, and a

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).

[Larry W]

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.

[Leon]

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.

[Leon]

news:km8ne6$4hj$ [e-mail]:

grams of black

of, say, 25

know is not the

and nails

2.5 liters, and a

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.

[Doug Miller]

[e-mail] wrote in news: [e-mail]:

grams of black

of, say, 25

know is not the

and nails

2.5 liters, and a

to

Did this discussion ruffle your hair at all?

[krw]

grams of black

of, say, 25

know is not

and nails

2.5 liters, and

come close

Of course not. My hair comes pre-ruffled. You're not going to change it.

[-MIKE-]

come close to

Gun power can.

[krw]

come close to

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).

[Swingman]

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.

[CW]

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.

[clare]

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

[clare]

news:km8ne6$4hj$ [e-mail]:

grams of black

is not the

liters, and a

ANd a pressure cooker is often made of CAST Aluminum - which is fragile / brittle in nature.

[Lew Hodgett]

------------------------------------------------------------------

"-MIKE-" wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------------- Lew Hodgett wrote:

------------------------------------------------------------------

"-MIKE-" wrote:

----------------------------------------------------------------- Lew Hodgett wrote:

What do you call the parts of the vessel that are created when a vessel bursts?

Chopped liver?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "-MIKE-" wrote:

----------------------------------------------------------------- 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

[Denis G.]