Is there a steal autoclave out there which can withstand very high pressure, at 450 C that one can part with? Steam - 4-8-2015 at 17:20
Have you tried ebay? Generally you can find a fairly good deal on such items with a bit of sleuthing...ryan81 - 4-8-2015 at 17:25
Yes sir. I have,
But I am still ambivalent they can reach the pressure and temp. I am looking for. It would be great to have a solid recommendation. careysub - 4-8-2015 at 17:28
What is "very high pressure" to you?ryan81 - 4-8-2015 at 17:32
65-150 MPA...not to high, but thats it ryan81 - 4-8-2015 at 17:34
but yea, thats some pressure ryan81 - 4-8-2015 at 17:38
60 MPA will work just fine thoughryan81 - 4-8-2015 at 17:47
looking for the holy grail of autoclaves without spending more than $9500Oscilllator - 4-8-2015 at 23:45
I think the closest thing you're going to get is a steel diving cylinder (not aluminium obviously). Looking at the wiki page it seems you can get
300bar/30MPa cylinders. I suspect the cylinders will be significantly weakened at those kinds of temperatures though. Fulmen - 5-8-2015 at 00:11
Bhoy, that's a decent bomb if I ever saw one. I could probably design it, but it's not trivial work and you'd still need someone skilled to make it. I
would strongly recommend a pressure vessel steel like A285, these are intended for temperatures up to 4-500°C.
Oscillator: Without knowing the actual steel used in a tank I would be very uncomfortable with elevated temperatures.
[Edited on 5-8-15 by Fulmen]Dr.Bob - 5-8-2015 at 04:24
I would never use a vessel not designed for chemicals at those temps and pressures. That would be not only dangerous for yourself but also any
neighbors. But steel pressure reactors do go on sale, and most have a model number which can be used to verify the pressures and temps that they are
rated for. I have used several of them, and they are a pain to use, but work OK. But they should be used in a hood or similar space with a blast
shield, in case the over-pressure vent gives way. I have only seen small glass pressure tubes fail, inside a shielded reactor, that was quite a
spectacular amount of noise, but if a steel one does, it becomes a serious danger.
Parr Instruments makes many of those, so perhaps check there website for which models might work. Then check Ebay and other science auctions, there
are plenty of labs closing in the US. careysub - 5-8-2015 at 11:11
Ah, the glories of an earlier age - where individual ingenuity would devise makeshift solutions fearlessly! The glorious age of boiler explosions!
In reviewing the list you will note there are not many of these in recent decades, and most of the ones that have occurred recently were explosions of
old equipment. There are 20 listed boiler explosions with double digit fatalities but the last one was in 1918.
IMHO: if you can't afford proper equipment for this you shouldn't be doing it.
[Edited on 5-8-2015 by careysub]annaandherdad - 5-8-2015 at 11:33
Here's a video of a guy who has made supercritical CO2. He is a lot more competent that I am, but even so I'd be nervous about being around this
thing.
A 1 litre vessel at 100MPa stores 100 KJ or so of energy.
That's about half a pound of TNT equivalent.
How big a vessel do you want?
If it's less that a centimetre on each side it might be realistic.careysub - 5-8-2015 at 12:55
A 1 litre vessel at 100MPa stores 100 KJ or so of energy.
That's about half a pound of TNT equivalent.
How big a vessel do you want?
If it's less that a centimetre on each side it might be realistic.
No, its about 25 g of TNT equivalent - but, hey, that's a lot!
Haven't done the math myself, but I do not doubt that the stored energy would be substantial. Personally I find the pucker factor of a 60MPa vessel to
be way beyond my comfort zone, but to each his own.
As for the design I would have to do some digging for relevant standards, but the math itself isn't hard. A heavy walled pipe with welded flanges and
bolted end caps would be my choice as it is simple and easy to modify. This design would also allow the bolts to act as a burst safety limiting the
main danger to two directions.
It looks like ASME requires a safety valve at 1.1 MAWP, a 1.5 yield and a 3.5 ultimate tensile safety factor for pressure vessels.
