Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[gondolier88]

Ian,

re. 'Higher output';

Yes, more free area from one safety valve would be one way, but thinking none latterally, you could make a manifold to screw into the safety valve bush, that ten has two bushings fro two safety valves- one set to working pressure, the other set 3-5 psi higher as in full size practice- this way you have not only increased free area, you've doubled it, also halving any probability, though tiny to start with, of actual failure of the safety to work at all.

Greg

[Circlip]

Yes Greg, I also remember the "New" thoughts about safety valve sizing when they were first mooted for the clearance area increase. Reading through the post that Colin added, with ref TO safety valves, it only states lift pressure and the fact a 10% OVERPRESSURE lift is acceptable???

   While it may be very glib of Bunkerbarge to comment of relief of me staying away from Batley Road, he should also note that they play in a PUBLIC PARK and it only takes ONE misshap.  

  When flying on the local moors we always had the twits who thought it clever to beat up the hillside on a Sunday afternoon with Kids and others wandering about.  Seen the boaties chasing the waterbourne wildlife about too, what fun, wonder why most local parks won't allow "Screaming Jet Boats!" to operate, Oh yes, the last comment was from my local rag in the mid 60's.

   The original poster posed a question as a concerned operator and sadly with the equipment he has, it's a case of please yerself unless you enter one of the nationally sponsered events otherwise chuck it in the water and play to your hearts content. I wouldn't advocate this and I highly doubt he will do this either.

  Regards  Ian

[Underpressure]

The original poster posed a question as a concerned operator and sadly with the equipment he has, it's a case of please yerself unless you enter one of the nationally sponsered events otherwise chuck it in the water and play to your hearts content. I wouldn't advocate this and I highly doubt he will do this either.

Ian, I used to be the boiler tester for the club I was involved with, back when boiler and gas tank testing were compulsory. I remember being told that these requirements had been dropped, but in the light of the answers I received to my question, I decided it would be a good idea to contact both my old club and also a local (model) boiler maker who was a Cheddar Models employee, and get everything tested again.

Been inspecting everything today and it also looks like I will need to speak to Jerry Watson and get some O rings for the safety valves, they are all a LONG way past their sell by date. 

Neil

[Circlip]

Good onya Neil,  Cream ALWAYS rises to the top.

[Bunkerbarge]

Just to cut through the smoke screen for a second it is important to remember the basic concept and that is the fact that it is certainly simpler and easier and also more effective and therefore safer to test the safety valve on the plant.  Removing the valve is not only unecessary but it is undesirable and wandering around the pondside trying to find someone clutching a bike pump and a set of copper bagpipes is quite likely to achieve nothing more than getting some form of muck in the valve.

Even if the particular rules you are following indicate that a lift pressure is the only required criteria common sense indicates that we would want to see the valve do it's job and it can only do that in place.

[Circlip]

Wonder which part of ORGANISED EVENT couldn't be understood in post 6 ??  Nae problem, used to work in a place where they gave a thousand reasons for not being able to do things, but were afraid to bite the bullet.