"harry" wrote in message
...
On Saturday, 2 January 2016 14:02:04 UTC, Fredxxx wrote:
On 02/01/2016 13:11, John Rumm wrote:
On 02/01/2016 12:40, Fredxxx wrote:
On 31/12/2015 16:26, wrote:
On 31/12/2015 08:31, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 December 2015 17:40:45 UTC,
wrote:
A couple of weeks ago I replaced the safety valve (AKA "ready to
serve"
indicator) in the elderly pressure cooker, but failed to look
closely at
the new part. Today I offered to produce stock from the Turkey
carcass
and some ageing veg and decided to use the pressure cooker. All was
well, with the usual hissing, until a thunderous fountain of steam,
turkey, fat and water erupted vertically, hit the extractor and
spread-out horizontally across about a third of the kitchen - 'twas
surprising how long it continued! Step-daughter's chap was frying
some
sausages at the time and will probably take several days to recover
from
the experience (fortunately the only damage was psychological).
It took two of us to clean-up the mess and I have a nasty feeling
that
I'll need to dismantle the extractor to clean the fan.
The cause: it seems that the design of the valve has changed and I
had
fitted it upside down. When looking closely, the top of the new one
is
cunningly and mischievously marked "top".
Bu&&er!

Happy New Year to all.

Bollix.
Pressure cookers are fitted with deadweight pressure relief valves.
Virtually impossible to go wrong. Or "fit upside down".
If there were a steam explosion in a kitchen anyone nearby would be
lucky to survive.
So, an entirely fictitious story.


Oh dear! Until now I hadn't understood why so many regulars make fun
of
you, or why you persist in posting so many strange links. Ho hum.
A (my) pressure cooker has a safety valve and interchangeable
weights;
the safety valve acts as an, errrrr, safety valve and the weights
allow
the appropriate pressure to be set.

I have never known a safety valve to operate on a pressure cooker.

ISTR recall a friend of the family from way back had one operate - she
did not have enough liquid in it, and allowed it to boil dry. So the
pintle in the valve melted and let by.

(I think it shook her up a bit, since after that she would always leave
the room when it was on!)

I have no idea how safe pressure cookers are as they're not generally
tested after a few years of use, unlike any other pressure vessel. Yet
I have never known one to fail. They were all the vogue a few decades
ago, probably when most cooks felt their duty was to cook veg within an
inch of annihilation?

I must admit as a child I would feel unhappy being in the same room as
one!

They are massively over constructed.

Yes.

The chance of failure is extremely remote.

And the way they fail is normally with the safety valve blowing out, by
design.

I suppose that metal fatigue will get them in the end after many thousands
of cycles.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

What actually happens is that the safety valve fails safe.

On 03/01/2016 06:42, harry wrote:
On Saturday, 2 January 2016 15:47:13 UTC, John Rumm wrote:

The also don't operate at huge pressures in comparison to most
"real" pressure vessels... even a normal *vented* domestic cylinder
can be operating at a higher pressure in a tall Victorian
property.

They highest setting is normally 15psi.

Precisely, not a demanding application.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/