Fire & Water - pics are posted

Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com

Materials used were a fresh 20 pound propane tank, a 5-gallon plastic
bucket, a number 3 washtub, a valve and hose assembly from a gas
burner, and a few odds & ends.

Tried the plastic bucket first, hoping to get a small flame area, but
it was obvious early on that too much heat was being generated for the
plastic, so I filled up the metal washtub and began experimenting
there.

The fire is sustainable, but very sensitive to ambient wind, which
dissipates the gas before it can ignite. The only time I could
realistically expect to use this in the pond would be during the
summer when there is very little wind.

To keep the flame going in the wind, I had to pretty much either open
the valve fully (which causes an enormous amount of bubbling), or else
place the gas nozzle very close to the surface.

OTOH, on the rare occasions when the wind died down, the flame was
pretty much what I was hoping for in terms of appearance and sound.

At one point I let it burn for about 10 minutes duration, there was no
measurable change in water temperature, but there -was- a residue left
floating on the water. The residue was almost transparent, no
discernable color, no smell. It did not have the characteristic
rainbow appearance that floating oil has.

My pond is intentionally designed so that I can "skim" it by
overfilling it any time, so I think the residue is a moot point,
assuming it is not horribly toxic.

Since the residue had no smell, I don't believe it is the (toxic)
mercaptin which is used to make the gas smell.

Tomorrow I may try it in the pond if the winds abate a bit.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

Mike,
Interesting idea. I kinda like the effect . Do you suppose the results might
be different if one used natural gas ( lighter than air ) instead of propane
( heavier than air )? Just thinking with my fingers.
Paul


"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
...
Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com

Materials used were a fresh 20 pound propane tank, a 5-gallon plastic
bucket, a number 3 washtub, a valve and hose assembly from a gas
burner, and a few odds & ends.

Tried the plastic bucket first, hoping to get a small flame area, but
it was obvious early on that too much heat was being generated for the
plastic, so I filled up the metal washtub and began experimenting
there.

The fire is sustainable, but very sensitive to ambient wind, which
dissipates the gas before it can ignite. The only time I could
realistically expect to use this in the pond would be during the
summer when there is very little wind.

To keep the flame going in the wind, I had to pretty much either open
the valve fully (which causes an enormous amount of bubbling), or else
place the gas nozzle very close to the surface.

OTOH, on the rare occasions when the wind died down, the flame was
pretty much what I was hoping for in terms of appearance and sound.

At one point I let it burn for about 10 minutes duration, there was no
measurable change in water temperature, but there -was- a residue left
floating on the water. The residue was almost transparent, no
discernable color, no smell. It did not have the characteristic
rainbow appearance that floating oil has.

My pond is intentionally designed so that I can "skim" it by
overfilling it any time, so I think the residue is a moot point,
assuming it is not horribly toxic.

Since the residue had no smell, I don't believe it is the (toxic)
mercaptin which is used to make the gas smell.

Tomorrow I may try it in the pond if the winds abate a bit.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

Thanks Paul,

Yah, I was thinking of trying that, but since the gas pipes in the
house are black iron, I'd have to do some non-trivial work to get it
piped outside.

OTOH, I have gas running to the fireplace with access via the basement
below, so it might be as simple as replacing an elbow with a "T" and
then using reducers to get it down to a size I can use flexible tubing
on, at least for experimentation purposes.

Now I need to look up the code standards for -that-...

A propane tank I could just place near the pond, but no way would I go
to the trouble to run 3/4" ID iron pipe out to the pond, but if I can
find some code-acceptable flexible tubing I could run underground, I'd
be in business.

That's assuming that NG would work better than propane, of course.

Since the propane was so sensitive to wind, I kinda think NG would be
even worse. But then, that's why it's called "experimentation".

Mike


On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 19:04:57 -0800, "Paul in Redland"
wrote:

Mike,
Interesting idea. I kinda like the effect . Do you suppose the results might
be different if one used natural gas ( lighter than air ) instead of propane
( heavier than air )? Just thinking with my fingers.
Paul


"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
.. .
Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com

SNIP

Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

It looks cool just seems like the flame is so close to the tank Don't
blow yourself up lol



http://community.webtv.net/rebeljoe/POND

It looks cool just seems like the flame is so close to the tank Don't
blow yourself up lol



http://community.webtv.net/rebeljoe/POND

Thanks Paul,

Yah, I was thinking of trying that, but since the gas pipes in the
house are black iron, I'd have to do some non-trivial work to get it
piped outside.

OTOH, I have gas running to the fireplace with access via the basement
below, so it might be as simple as replacing an elbow with a "T" and
then using reducers to get it down to a size I can use flexible tubing
on, at least for experimentation purposes.

Now I need to look up the code standards for -that-...

A propane tank I could just place near the pond, but no way would I go
to the trouble to run 3/4" ID iron pipe out to the pond, but if I can
find some code-acceptable flexible tubing I could run underground, I'd
be in business.

That's assuming that NG would work better than propane, of course.

Since the propane was so sensitive to wind, I kinda think NG would be
even worse. But then, that's why it's called "experimentation".

Mike


On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 19:04:57 -0800, "Paul in Redland"
wrote:

Mike,
Interesting idea. I kinda like the effect . Do you suppose the results might
be different if one used natural gas ( lighter than air ) instead of propane
( heavier than air )? Just thinking with my fingers.
Paul


"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
.. .
Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com

SNIP

Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

Mike,
Interesting idea. I kinda like the effect . Do you suppose the results might
be different if one used natural gas ( lighter than air ) instead of propane
( heavier than air )? Just thinking with my fingers.
Paul


"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
...
Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com

Materials used were a fresh 20 pound propane tank, a 5-gallon plastic
bucket, a number 3 washtub, a valve and hose assembly from a gas
burner, and a few odds & ends.

Tried the plastic bucket first, hoping to get a small flame area, but
it was obvious early on that too much heat was being generated for the
plastic, so I filled up the metal washtub and began experimenting
there.

The fire is sustainable, but very sensitive to ambient wind, which
dissipates the gas before it can ignite. The only time I could
realistically expect to use this in the pond would be during the
summer when there is very little wind.

To keep the flame going in the wind, I had to pretty much either open
the valve fully (which causes an enormous amount of bubbling), or else
place the gas nozzle very close to the surface.

OTOH, on the rare occasions when the wind died down, the flame was
pretty much what I was hoping for in terms of appearance and sound.

At one point I let it burn for about 10 minutes duration, there was no
measurable change in water temperature, but there -was- a residue left
floating on the water. The residue was almost transparent, no
discernable color, no smell. It did not have the characteristic
rainbow appearance that floating oil has.

My pond is intentionally designed so that I can "skim" it by
overfilling it any time, so I think the residue is a moot point,
assuming it is not horribly toxic.

Since the residue had no smell, I don't believe it is the (toxic)
mercaptin which is used to make the gas smell.

Tomorrow I may try it in the pond if the winds abate a bit.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

I looked at all the pictures and I have one question: WHY?

Nedra

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pines/4836
http://community.webshots.com/user/nedra118

"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
...
Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com

Materials used were a fresh 20 pound propane tank, a 5-gallon plastic
bucket, a number 3 washtub, a valve and hose assembly from a gas
burner, and a few odds & ends.

Tried the plastic bucket first, hoping to get a small flame area, but
it was obvious early on that too much heat was being generated for the
plastic, so I filled up the metal washtub and began experimenting
there.

The fire is sustainable, but very sensitive to ambient wind, which
dissipates the gas before it can ignite. The only time I could
realistically expect to use this in the pond would be during the
summer when there is very little wind.

To keep the flame going in the wind, I had to pretty much either open
the valve fully (which causes an enormous amount of bubbling), or else
place the gas nozzle very close to the surface.

OTOH, on the rare occasions when the wind died down, the flame was
pretty much what I was hoping for in terms of appearance and sound.

At one point I let it burn for about 10 minutes duration, there was no
measurable change in water temperature, but there -was- a residue left
floating on the water. The residue was almost transparent, no
discernable color, no smell. It did not have the characteristic
rainbow appearance that floating oil has.

My pond is intentionally designed so that I can "skim" it by
overfilling it any time, so I think the residue is a moot point,
assuming it is not horribly toxic.

Since the residue had no smell, I don't believe it is the (toxic)
mercaptin which is used to make the gas smell.

Tomorrow I may try it in the pond if the winds abate a bit.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

What is the point of your question?

I do it because it's fun, interesting, educational, and no one else
appears to have done it yet, though this guy is close:
http://www.corsonart.com/

Why do you go to all the trouble and work and expense and worry to
keep ponds, fish, pets, gardens?

Who knows, in a couple of years your friends may be purchasing "Fire &
Water" kits from me...or not.

I certainly don't place myself in the same league with these folks,
but I think the sentiment applies somewhat:

"Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that
never were and ask why not." - Robert Kennedy

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from
mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein

"Think for yourself and let others enjoy the privilege of doing so
too." - Voltaire

Mike


On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:38:10 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote:

I looked at all the pictures and I have one question: WHY?

Nedra

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pines/4836
http://community.webshots.com/user/nedra118

"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
.. .
Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com
snip
Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

I just wondered Why mix water and fire... they seem so
mutually exclusive is all

As to your second question.. I go to all the work and trouble
because I enjoy the looks and sound of water and its inhabitants.

No offense was intended.

Nedra
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pines/4836
http://community.webshots.com/user/nedra118

"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
...
What is the point of your question?

I do it because it's fun, interesting, educational, and no one else
appears to have done it yet, though this guy is close:
http://www.corsonart.com/

Why do you go to all the trouble and work and expense and worry to
keep ponds, fish, pets, gardens?

Who knows, in a couple of years your friends may be purchasing "Fire &
Water" kits from me...or not.

I certainly don't place myself in the same league with these folks,
but I think the sentiment applies somewhat:

"Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that
never were and ask why not." - Robert Kennedy

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from
mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein

"Think for yourself and let others enjoy the privilege of doing so
too." - Voltaire

Mike


On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:38:10 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote:

I looked at all the pictures and I have one question: WHY?

Nedra

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pines/4836
http://community.webshots.com/user/nedra118

"Mike Patterson" wrote in message
.. .
Finally got a chance to play with the fire & water idea today, had the
kids take pictures, they can be seen he

http://www.the-patterson-family.com
snip
Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.