|
If tanked oxygen were free and the tanks were...
...conveniently delivered to your workspace, would you still own a concentrator?
I am just wondering if anyone feels that their torch runs just as efficiently and effectively on a concentrator setup as it does on tanked oxygen? Or, is it a compromise you are willing to make because tanked oxygen is expensive and a pain in the ass to tote back and forth? What say you? |
If tanked were free, I'd go with tanked. Oxy cons use electricity and make noise.
|
Yep, I would go with tanked oxy too!!!
|
Heck no!:-) That concentrator would be outta here!
|
I would absolutely go with tanked. Heck, if it was free I'd even go pick it up myself. :)
|
Quote:
|
Tanked here.
|
Tanked.
Georgia |
Tanked!
|
Tanked makes a nice flame, but I do not want to lift tanks.
|
If tanked is free, then liquid will be too. LIQUID!
|
I'd be tanked!
As already mentioned, noise, initial costs and electricity.
Another reason, with Oxycons, you are limited on pressure and flow amounts the machine(s) is/are capable of delivering. As they age this may decline and eventually the machines will need to be repaired/replaced. With a tank, your limitation is your regulator setting. Not that anyone uses a torch that requires 50 PSI & 50 LPM today, but who knows what the future holds. :?: After a purchase, a tank costs $25-30 every 5-10 years for hydro inspection. Much less costs with the tanks (being that in this world, the refills are free) One final thought, with a tank if the electricity is out you can still torch during the day... |
tanked, better purity
|
In order of purity and preference:
First: Liquid Second: Bottles Last: Concentrators Malcolm |
Uhmm....A lot of folks run their torches at 50-60psi oxy.
Quote:
|
Read the entire sentence.. 50PSI and 50LPM!
Quote:
|
I use oxygen and sold/gave away my concentrators and generator when they were barely used, because I ended up working in boro. The machines were great for soft glass, but there's no way a machine can give me the working speed and vibrant colors that tanked oxygen does.
I can't even imagine getting free O2 with free delivery on top of that! :biggrin: Anita www.nitabeads.com |
I have a big $$$ machine that can run two torches at once and it's all the oxygen I will ever need, so I love it! But free is even better, so I would go with the tanks.
|
I'd prefer tanked, but I'm getting great service from the two EX-15's I got from Malcolm.
They're quiet and run my old Bethlehem Starfire just fine, even the big outer ring, and it's really nice not having to pay the megabucks for oxy refill, delivery and hazmat charges. The 2 oxy's paid for themselves in the first 6 months. And maybe I'm just paranoid, but it's nice not to have 4 big fire-accelerant tank bombs in my studio - just one less bit of 'possible ohshit' to worry about. |
Quote:
|
ha ha, here you can't buy a tank you have to rent them and that's where they get you!!! the oxy might be free but the rental would kill you, I will stick to concentrators in this country. and the Phantom runs fantastically on them. B
|
I have an Onsite Pro 4 oxy generator that will run my Arnold full bore. I have never used concentrators but the Pro 4 shows no difference in performance then bottled oxy for my work. Just another option. They are expensive though and you have to have an air compressor to feed it. I have had mine for about 10 years with no one issues what so ever and the company is great. All you have to do is change the filters every year or so at the cost of about $50.00. Just another option.
|
Quote:
|
You are welcome to come and see it Larry.
Quote:
|
If the oxygen was in a spherical tank with a ring base perhaps it would be a much safer container for home use, stronger too.
B |
Quote:
|
If it was free, tanked. I don't seem to be able to fume with my oxy con.
|
I loved tank when I had it. Loved the quiet and the bright flame.
|
I realise that oxy tanks have been the shape they are for a long time, the two main reasons I can see for this shape ( and there may be more) is strength and ease of manufacture, (the cylinder is still not as strong as a sphere) the shape of the bottles gives them a very high centre of gravity and this makes them difficult to handle, you only need to get them a few degrees off vertical and they will topple, most men can of course handle this but most women can not, imagine a cylinder half the height and twice the width, the centre of gravity is now so low in the cylinder that it becomes difficult to tip it over making it much safer to handle, thus making it much safer for home use and especially where women are concerned, I think your statement "if handled right" is very interesting and in itself suggests potential problems. Perhaps a spherical bottle would raise the cost of manufacturing but a short wide bottle would not, I would imagine the cost and strength would be similar but the safety for handlers would be very much improved. I teach many workshops in other peoples studios and with a class of perhaps 12, all being women, I am the only person able to handle the standard G size bottle safely and I'm in my 70s, the women in the workshops are terrified of the big tall bottles because they do not have the strength to hold them if they tip.
cheers, Bernard |
Tanked in a heartbeat!
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 6:42am. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.