h a l f b a k e r y"My only concern is that it wouldn't work, which I see as a problem."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Sometimes you need to clean some corrosion off of a hard to
reach spot on your fuel-injector hardlines. There's not a lot,
but it's down in the corner by the fitting and you can't get to
it with a wire brush or sandpaper. The obvious solution would
be sand blasting, but that requires an air
compressor, an
abrasive blasting gun, and you still have to buy the sand. I
propose a one-time-use aerosol can full of sand with a plastic
nozzle designed for up-close sandblasting. It may require
some internal plumbing in the can to get the sand to fly out
at a good speed. This can be solved with trial and error. Now
when you need to blast that small part, doodad, or fuel
injector hardline you just buy a couple cans from the store,
blast away, and throw them out when you're done. Vacuum
up the excess sand.
Here's a standard can bursting,
https://www.youtube...watch?v=rR-S7-fAVTg
The top of the can stretched loudly at about 225 psi, the can burst at around 365 psi [doctorremulac3, Oct 25 2018]
US20060211339A1
https://patents.goo.../US20060211339A1/en
Aerosol sandblast [xaviergisz, Oct 25 2018]
US5181349
https://patents.goo...atent/US5181349A/en
Self-powered unitary portable granular particle ejector tool [xaviergisz, Oct 26 2018]
Public Patent Application Information Retrieval
https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
[xaviergisz, Oct 26 2018]
Diagram 6 - duckling in the can
https://drive.googl...BCNx7Kn7l88tDJkZ520
[not_morrison_rm, Oct 26 2018]
[link]
|
| |
This is actually a bloody brilliant idea. |
|
| |
If this would work somebody HAS to have thought of this no? |
|
| |
I'm assuming that the pressure necessary to cause actual
abrasion is way beyond what you can cram into a metal can. |
|
| |
what if you have the sand, then a two part mixture that
when mixed by depressing the nozzle basically causes a
controlled explosion
driving the sand out at the required velocity? |
|
| |
Then you'd only need a very small hardened mixing area /
combustion chamber that could then vent to the outside
bernouliing or otherwise carrying the grit with it. |
|
| |
Sounds like a money maker. I was first thinking about how it
is a shame to have one more source of cans in the trash (or
possibly recycling). On the other hand, if this encourages
more people to do more to fix up used items rather than
just replacing them, it might more than offset a few cans in
the trash. [+] |
|
| |
//I'm assuming that the pressure necessary to cause actual
abrasion is way beyond what you can cram into a metal
can.// Well, regular compressors have reservoir tanks, so at
least they can take the pressure. And smaller pressure vessels
can take higher pressures. |
|
| |
I have seen dry ice generators attached to a CO2 generator
in print. Perhaps another version could make its own dry
ice and fling that down the nozzle. |
|
| |
//Well, regular compressors have reservoir tanks, so at
least
they can take the pressure.// |
|
| |
Yea, but I've owned one, they're built like a bomb. Very
thick metal, cans are very thin. Guess you could have a
thick can, but then aren't we getting away from cheap
and
convenient? Don't get me wrong, great idea, just
wondering how much
you'd have to have can that's made of thick metal and is 5
pounds empty. |
|
| |
Ok, so a standard can blows up at 320 PSI. Let me look up
how much pressure you need for a sandblaster. |
|
| |
Hmm. Says you only need 100 PSI to sand blast. Maybe
you can just use an existing can. But waaait a minute. I've
put my hand in front of a can of hairspray and a
sandblaster. The sandblaster almost takes your hand off
so it's the flow of air not just the pressure which I thought
were directly related. High pressure high air flow. What
am I missing? It says you
need 25 cubic feet of air per minute. Can an aerosol can
deliver that? If so I'm guessing you'd get about 3 or 4
seconds out of it. |
|
| |
But remember, if it is a problem, the problem is solved
with the heavy chamber
where you have the hypergolic propellant mixed and
simply throwing the sand into the escape stream. If it's
not a problem, the idea of having a rocket in your hand
powering your sand blaster is very awesome. Plus it's a
blowtorch. |
|
| |
Yes. Do it ... do it NOW ... |
|
| |
High Test Peroxide would do it but then I think we're
getting away from cheap and convenient. |
|
| |
Otto fuel (PGDN) would be a reasonable alternative to HTP ... |
|
| |
Did they have a three year old generate their patent
drawings? |
|
| |
How about a gunpowder sand mixture and a cycling ignition
chamber? Sort of a machine gun in a can only shooting sand. |
|
| |
I think sometimes patent applicants in the US file
deliberately bad drawings so that the examiner directs
them to file better drawings. If they only filed slightly bad
drawings, they might not be given the opportunity to
amend. (this is just a hypothesis) |
|
| |
You can have a look at the the documents associated with
the patent application (I've put a link to the US patent
office Public Patent Application Information Retrieval). |
|
| |
In this case the applicant did file better drawings, but alas
it was to no avail. The examiner had found good prior art
(US 5,181,349) which the applicant was unable to
overcome. |
|
| |
The can might be reusable though this gets away from
the original idea. A thicker can, more air under higher
pressure and an internal straw to pick up the sand
from the bottom. A screw port on the bottom would
accept replacement sand, then re-pressurize an air
fitting beside it. [+] |
|
| |
Maybe have it like of them paint spray guns, but with
the reservoir of sand in the top, and the compressed
air in the bottom. |
|
| |
NB US20060211339A1 there is quite clearly a duckling
in diagram 6, so not likely to go down well with the
animal welfare bods. Link. |
|
| |
Good idea but I could think of some terrible things
to do with this… Need to find a way to get the big
fat squirrels off the birdfeeder… |
|
| |
Good idea in principle, which is why it already has a patent on it. Don't want to be a humbug, but..... reaches into humbug jar...... |
|
| |
It’s not just a good idea, it’s a grit idea. Like the
good [doctorremulac3] says the can walls would
need to be thick, but it it could be a rechargeable
unit. No need to throw in the trash
[scad_mientist] |
|
| |
This is great. It's small and expensive on a per-use basis, but
that's just fine, it also has 0 setup time, so you can have
different varieties. You could have cans with media
calibrated by shore hardness or whatnot so that you could
tune the abrasive effect. Walnut shells, Glass, aluminum
oxide, whatever. "This bolt's rusted solid, pass me 9 cans of
the tungsten carbide, we'll see who's boss" |
|
| |
A regular aerosol can will take 200-250psi, though without a
lot of safety margin. Sandblasters (apparently) need
anywhere from 50psi upwards. |
|
| |
To get decent life out of the can, the contents would need to
be a liquified gas (as is the case in most aerosols). One
problem is that you could only spray for a short time before
the can got too cold; then you'd have to wait until it had
warmed up again. |
|
| |
Nice.
There's a video of some guy making a DIY sandblaster using a compressors' spray attachment and a plastic pop bottle full of sand which gravity-fed into the air-stream.
It works pretty well. You might be able to rig up a reusable sand blaster by substituting one of those hand-pumped herbicide containers if they hold enough PSI. (+) |
|
| |
Well, I guess considering there's half a dozen patents for this
already we're abandoning the whole "baked" thing. |
|
| |
Which is fine I guess, as long as the subject is interesting,
which is the whole point anyway. |
|
| |
It's not fine with me. The half bakery is supposed
to be about generating new ideas, and not
restating ones that already exist, as verified by rhe
patent documents in the links. Maybe I'll post an
idea for a bunch of hairs tied to the end of a stick
that you can dip into a tin of paint, then rub it up
and down on a surface to colour it in. I'll call it The
Hairy Stick. |
|
| |
I'm sorry, but my entourage has patented "The Hairy Stick" |
|
| |
It may be baked but, like [xenzag] it is not WKTE. |
|
| |
Some ideas just get a sort of defacto amnesty I guess. |
|
| |
I guess it depends if the posting is genuine or not. If it is an original independent invention then... kudos, but being known for scouring obscure patents to present as one's own for fake internet points is pretty lame so I doubt anyone would really want to make a career out of it. |
|
| |
You don't have your Decade-Card yet [DIYMatt].
We're watching you...
...you and your cool ideas nobody has gotten around to making yet shenanigans mister. |
|
| |
I need this for the detail work on sandcastles at the
beach. |
|
| |
I posted this because I was actually looking for said
product and couldn't find it. I googled by any
search terms I could think of, and of course searched
HB first. I did not search through decades old patent
filings that were never developed upon. But a large
part of why I post here is to hear people's thoughts on
an idea and poke holes in it, often explaining /why/
something was never developed. The fact that
someone dug up an old patent on it and we have a
discussion going about whether or not it would work
makes me think it was worth posting. |
|
| |
I poorly recall a guy etching car windows with license plate numbers using a scuba tank and a airbrush type unit. Does that count? |
|
| |
No, he ran off and hid in a nunnery, claiming diplomatic immunity, benefit of clergy, and droit du seigneur. |
|
| |
Then he phoned you and got you to send one of your helicopters to rescue him before the police arrived, don't you remember ? Quite why those nuns keep letting Sturton in after dark is inexplicable. And they really should turn that grail-shaped beacon off when it's not needed. |
|
| |