On Nov 17, 11:14 am, Ron wrote:
On Nov 17, 10:53 am, Ron wrote:

On Nov 15, 10:09 am, "HeyBub" wrote:

Evidently not. Who knew?

"A man using a vacuum cleaner to suck gasoline out of a vehicle was burned
and his house damaged when the fuel exploded, the Albuquerque Fire
Department said."

http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2007/nov...lbuquerque-man...

Well, there was an episode of "Mythbusters" were they *tried* to get a
vacuum cleaner (wet/dry) to blowup using this method and nothing
happened.

Shop-Vac Jet Engine

Myth: A guy was cleaning his pool and heard an explosion. He went to
his neighbor's house -- his neighbor was using a shop-vac to get the
sediment off the bottom of the gas tank in his boat. The fumes went
through the shop-vac and turned it into a turbine engine.

Test 1: Shop-Vac + Gas Can

They put a small amount of gas in a gas can so that it was mostly full
of fumes. They hooked it up to a shop-vac for five minutes to see if
they could get an explosion.

No explosion. It turns out that the shop-vac that they had chosen,
like most new shop-vacs, has a safety featu the motor is isolated
from the tank and air running through the tank, so the motor can't
spark the fumes.

Test 2: Short-circuited shop-vac + Gas Can

By accident, they short-circuited their shop-vac parts, sending sparks
everywhere. Happy with this discovery, they decide to rig a worst-case
shop-vac: short-circuit and a hole drilled through to allow the spark
to reach the fumes. They also added more gas to the gas can.

No explosion.


I saw this episode too. They tried pretty hard to get it to ignite,
but couldn't. But I don't doubt that with the right vac under just
the right conditions it could explode. And of course anyone doing
this with a shop vac is an idiot.

Reminds me of a teacher back in high school. He decided to use a shop
vac to suck water out of his swimming pool, which might not be such a
bad idea, if there was a small amount on the bottom of the pool. But
he did it by taking the top part of the vacuum and holding it while
standing in the pool water, thereby electrocuting himself.




Test 3: Creating a Jet-engine out of Vacuum Parts

Tory went to A&G Vacuum shop to pick up some more vacuums. A&G Vacuum
was the site of Adam's facial run-in with a vacuum motor (Adam decided
to stick his face near a motor, which pulled in and chopped up his
lip). The Vacuum Man showed Tory an older vacuum that was capable of
sparking fumes into a fire.

This proved that it's possible for a vacuum to catch on fire, but it
didn't turn into a jet engine. With this in mind, Tory was tasked with
replicating the results of the myth, i.e. creating a jet-engine out of
vacuum parts.

Tory's design:

* Vacuum motor sucks in air into a tube
* Fuel injector made from a propane ring from a propane stove
* Flame catcher made from a conical strainer
* Fans at back

Tory: "There are going to be a lot of engineers out there going, 'What
the hell is he doing?' and I'm asking myself that on a moment-by-
moment basis, 'What the hell am I doing?'"

Tory's vacuum-based jet-engine was hung up chamber with an ignitor.
First try: no ignition. Tory moved the ignitor to the end of the
engine. Second try: still no ignition. Tory then tried an open flame
at the end of the chamber: finally, ignition.

There was a tiny, tiny bit of thrust when the vacuum motor started,
but for the most part it just tossed flames around the chamber.

Jamie's explanation:

"The whole concept of a vacuum cleaner being a jet engine is all
wrong. It goes against the principles that make jet engines. Vacuum
cleaner create vacuums, that's low pressure. A jet engine works by
creating more pressure, which completes the compression, so it's just
not practical."

mythbusted

http://tinyurl.com/2sclx7