Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hazmat Highway to Hell with Oxygen Cylinders
YT ^ | 02/03/14 | Jay Patterson

Posted on 02/12/2014 7:29:53 AM PST by Doogle

Great Icebreaker video for a HAZMAT Class demonstrating the dangers of insecure high pressure cylinders in a highway accident. This was an accident that occurred in Russia. Russians have dashcams in order to provide additional evidence in court due to guard against police corruption and insurance fraud. This version contains no music.

(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: whoa
WHOA.......
1 posted on 02/12/2014 7:29:53 AM PST by Doogle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Chode

ping

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG1LGKieTxY


2 posted on 02/12/2014 7:31:09 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

Those weren’t oxygen cylinders...


3 posted on 02/12/2014 7:38:37 AM PST by Quality_Not_Quantity (Liars use facts when the truth doesn't suit their purposes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

Let’s be clear.

OXYGEN neither burns nor explodes. Ever.

Oxygen is the oxidizer (duh) in a fire like this.

Compressed flammable gasses are the fuel here, as well as initially likely the fuel of the truck and the bus it ran into.

REM: I am a former firefighter.

Google BLEVE and Class B fires.


4 posted on 02/12/2014 7:39:53 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

Oxygen does NOT burn.
More than likely the cylinders were welding equipment blends of gases.
Oxygen is required for combustion, but if you hold a lit match in a room full of pure oxygen nothing will blow up. You might burn your fingers though as the match would burn very hot and very fast.


5 posted on 02/12/2014 7:40:01 AM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quality_Not_Quantity

Indeed. If you can make oxygen “burn” you are a great alchemist or a ‘nuculer’ physicist.


6 posted on 02/12/2014 7:40:38 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Doogle
Some of the tanks burned like fuel tanks rather than burning other fuel like oxygen tanks. Dumping oxygen into a fire is a good way to get an explosion but those which were tossed free just outgassed because there was no fuel or ignition source. However at least a couple tanks tossed away from the main fire looked like they were burning on their own.
7 posted on 02/12/2014 7:41:46 AM PST by KarlInOhio (Recycled Olympic tagline Shut up, Bob Costas. Shut up! Shut up! Shut up! Shut up! Shut up! Shut up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

looks more like acetylene than oxygen


8 posted on 02/12/2014 7:41:46 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

What was that cop thinking?


9 posted on 02/12/2014 7:42:51 AM PST by houeto (We intend to liberate Democrats from the dreaded Job-Lock this November!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: houeto

“I’m too close”


10 posted on 02/12/2014 7:44:04 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Quality_Not_Quantity

...not my comment...*smiles*


11 posted on 02/12/2014 7:44:26 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

definitely some eye popping goodness.

watched it twice... just as much fun the second time.

if fireworks were more like this, then maybe I’d find them more exciting ;)

+1


12 posted on 02/12/2014 7:46:15 AM PST by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

crazy Ivan


13 posted on 02/12/2014 7:48:40 AM PST by 12th_Monkey (One man one vote is a big fail, when the "one" man is an idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: houeto
What was that cop thinking?

Why won't this f***** car start ?

14 posted on 02/12/2014 7:51:08 AM PST by UCANSEE2 (I forgot what my tagline was supposed to say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

Of course oxygen doesn’t burn, BUT it increases the burn rate of any fuel by logarithmic numbers......

Just use a leaf blower on a leaf fire, and you’ll see an example. You’re adding oxygen, not fuel.

Oxygen is part of the combustion process, and to make any fuel burn faster - add oxygen. Adding oxygen will increase the burn rate many times more than adding fuel.

So, these could have been oxygen cylinders.


15 posted on 02/12/2014 7:56:17 AM PST by Arlis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

Hmmmm....wonder why all the shuttles had liquid oxygen tanks to fire the engines?

Because adding oxygen increases the combustion process more than adding fuel.......


16 posted on 02/12/2014 8:01:11 AM PST by Arlis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 12th_Monkey

..driver got out of there in a hurry...


17 posted on 02/12/2014 8:03:52 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Quality_Not_Quantity

Oxy tanks in NA are green. These were orange.
Anybody know if that protocol is used over there?

BTW nice job by the following car to get stopped quickly to avoid.


18 posted on 02/12/2014 8:04:21 AM PST by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FReepers
Did You Know?

The Current FReepathon Pays For The Current Quarters Expenses?

Please Donate And Keep FR Running


19 posted on 02/12/2014 8:05:42 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: houeto

We use the first cop laying on the ground to mark the hot zone. (^;

FWIW a full acetlene cylinder is at about 250psi and an O2 is about 2300

I have seen home O2 cylinders stuck through the wall after a fire. As the left the apartment, they looked like rockets as the aluminum burned.


20 posted on 02/12/2014 8:19:07 AM PST by Clay Moore ("To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." ~Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Arlis
It takes the oxygen in about 1100 cubic feet of air to burn one gallon of gasoline. Most fires are limited by the flow of oxygen rather than fuel.

I think it was the engineering department of Purdue which had competitions to quickly light a grill full of charcoal at their annual picnic. The competition was cancelled after they used charcoal, a lit cigarette for ignition and a container of liquid oxygen: the grill disappeared in the resulting fire.

21 posted on 02/12/2014 8:19:20 AM PST by KarlInOhio (Recycled Olympic tagline Shut up, Bob Costas. Shut up! Shut up! Shut up! Shut up! Shut up! Shut up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
Boiler Up! Not just a slogan LOL.


22 posted on 02/12/2014 8:20:54 AM PST by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

Those videos were great! Surely they’ve made it to YouTube by now.

Here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBLr_XrooLs

Too bad this was pre-ubiquitous HD cameras.


23 posted on 02/12/2014 8:30:58 AM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

Those are low pressure cylinders filled with a flammable gas. Definitely not oxygen cylinders.


24 posted on 02/12/2014 8:31:56 AM PST by meatloaf (Impeach Obama. That's my New Year's resolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

Several years ago, a bottle plant in the DFW area caught fire and the bottles were taking off like bottle rockets. I forgot how far the farthest one flew, but the video of that was scary.


25 posted on 02/12/2014 8:38:04 AM PST by Arrowhead1952 (The Second Amendment is NOT about the right to hunt. It IS a right to shoot tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arlis

No, not really. Look at the video again. You’ll see sevaral times some tanks with pressurized flames shooting out of their tops. Those are tanks where the valves at the top have failed due to pressure build up and heat.

The big balls of flame occur from explosions of suddenly released gas from tanks that have failed.

Truly - no harm no foul - go read about BLEVE.

Most likely there were some ‘oxygen’ tanks on that truck - as oxyacetylene sets.

But as someone who has attacked some pretty interesting and intense Class A/ B/ D fires in vehicle wrecks, I can assure you, oxygen tanks weren’t my big concern.

Those explosions you saw were typical to a gas release into a normal atmosphere.

I can’t read Russian, and the video was too blurry to read the labels and colors on the tanks as the truck passed the car, but ... that was by far primarily first a burning fuel fire (class B) followed by a BLEVE (special Class B fire)with maybe a little Class D and surely Class A thrown in for fun.

As I watched the video, what I saw was NOT any “detonations” of the taller, industrial gas cylinders (that RARELY happens) and the debris flying was from what looked like bit and pieces of truck - plus some cylinders flying in the air. THAT is all normal.

Ya gotta let it go. The title is misleading to anyone who has ever put on turnout gear.

If ya don’t know what turnout gear is, and why you never wear polyester T-shirts, then you probably should go with me here ;-)


26 posted on 02/12/2014 9:03:24 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Arrowhead1952

I remember it...


27 posted on 02/12/2014 9:09:34 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: meatloaf

yeah I know...


28 posted on 02/12/2014 9:10:20 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Arlis

Arlis —

The shuttle had two types of rocket motors, with two types of fuels, and two types of oxidants to produce either a programmed or controllable burn.

The solid rocket boosters on the side combined fuel and oxidizer in the ‘solid’ fuel molded into the tube of the booster. Absent that chemistry, there ain’t enough O2 in the upper atmosphere to burn the fuel at a rate sufficient to generate thrust. Once lit, that booster is gonna burn until the compound ‘fuel’ is exhausted.

The main motors on the shuttle could be throttled as they used both liquid fuel (I forget the name) and liquid oxygen. They could power up and power down those motors. No way to do that on the boosters.

So much for the technology discussion.

Let me go back to this — the explosions you saw in that video were typical of a gas released into a normal atmosphere. Sure there could have been some O2 released from leaking cylinders, but O2 NEVER goes boom.

NET: the title was misleading or wrong.


29 posted on 02/12/2014 9:10:28 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Clay Moore

Thank you Clay for correctly pointing out the AL was the fuel — a Class D fire.

O2 NEVER burns unless we are talking nuclear fires, and we ain’t.

The Oxygen cylinders are pressure-propelled when the top valve is broken off or otherwise fails.


30 posted on 02/12/2014 9:13:21 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

LOL


31 posted on 02/12/2014 9:15:24 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

IIRC, Hydrogen and other flammable gases are in yellow and orange, but sometimes only the caps mattered. It’s been 20 years ...

Green was always O2 for medical applications.

Over there, there’s no telling. ;-)

My **GUESS* is that this guy supplied industrial gases from a local distributor, so he was hauling oxy-acetylene, rare gases and maybe some propane for forklifts. The small propane tanks I (in the past) I saw light up looked a lot like the ‘explosions’ in that video.


32 posted on 02/12/2014 9:19:20 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Doogle
This version contains no music.

Sorely disappointed in this factoidal disclosure.

33 posted on 02/12/2014 9:34:24 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag
The main motors on the shuttle could be throttled as they used both liquid fuel (I forget the name) and liquid oxygen.

Liquid Hydrogen was the fuel.

http://www.space.com/11970-nasa-final-shuttle-mission-atlantis-sts135-tanking-test.html

34 posted on 02/12/2014 10:22:09 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

I found this video. Just over 10 minutes long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyUVswUkEIA


35 posted on 02/12/2014 11:12:16 AM PST by Arrowhead1952 (The Second Amendment is NOT about the right to hunt. It IS a right to shoot tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: thackney

interesting. I knew it was hydrazine in the thrusters. Couldn’t recall the main motors’ fuel.

ZERO ‘pollution’ using H2. Ya just make water vapor. Oh wait, THE *MOST* powerful greenhouse gas is water vapor ;-)


36 posted on 02/12/2014 11:17:19 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag
ZERO ‘pollution’ using H2.

Except the H2 is made by steam reforming Natural Gas.

Nobody has found an H2 tree for harvesting zero pollution fuel.

It is like claiming an Electric Car is zero pollution by ignoring most of the Electricity is made from Coal and Natural Gas.

37 posted on 02/12/2014 11:58:39 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Oh I agree. I failed to add the sarcasm tag.


38 posted on 02/12/2014 12:14:48 PM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

Ok, assuming that it is agreed that adding oxygen to a fuel fire will greatly accelerate the combustion - far more than adding an equivalent amount of fuel, how about this?

The oxygen tanks upon being overheated, burst simply because the pressure limits of the tank were exceeded. Then, immediately, a humongous amount of oxygen is added to whatever fuel is already burning.

I cannot imagine that the addition of this much oxygen so suddenly to an existing fueled fire - along with the “explosion” of the bursting tank - would not simulate an explosion.

This is why liquid oxygen is used to control the rockets in the shuttle - if it were not controlled, one would have an explosion - from the oxygen accelerating the combustion of the fuel. The rocket is in essence a controlled explosion. Most of the time. Let’s do some research on what happens when liquid oxygen tanks have burst open on a failed rocket launch. I’ll bet what happened was an explosion.

Never heard of this scenario being reproduced. Maybe Mythbusters could do it.


39 posted on 02/12/2014 2:26:12 PM PST by Arlis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Arlis

WHY do you even think oxygen tanks were on the truck?


40 posted on 02/12/2014 3:06:47 PM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Doogle
just damn...
41 posted on 02/12/2014 3:31:26 PM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag
U be right....

I'm a RRT and know a little about 02

42 posted on 02/12/2014 3:35:33 PM PST by Osage Orange (I have strong feelings about gun control. If there's a gun around, I want to be controlling it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

Good point. There may have been none.

But that wasn’t the question - at least as I saw it.

The question was what happens to any fire when a huge volume of
highly compressed oxygen is added to a fire.

I believe it would, for all practical purposes, appear the same as an explosion.

Not wanting to make a controversy or argument. Just wanting to point out a fact.


43 posted on 02/12/2014 7:35:13 PM PST by Arlis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

I think that this is like the Russian counterpart to the American Media’s portrayal of all rifles as AK-47’s.

All ‘tanks’ are OXYGEN tanks, no matter what is really in them. Either that or it’s just a translation problem. The original report may have said ‘compressed gas’ tanks.


44 posted on 02/12/2014 7:57:36 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (I forgot what my tagline was supposed to say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag; Arlis
WHY do you even think oxygen tanks were on the truck?

Because.... the word OXYGEN is in the title of the article ?

45 posted on 02/12/2014 7:59:39 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (I forgot what my tagline was supposed to say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

And my point, and the point of other firefighters on this thread is that the TITLE is misleading.

OXYGEN is NOT flammable. PERIOD.

An Oxygen leak is WAY down on the list of concerns if the leak is outdoors.

The flammable/explosive gases on that truck were the cause of EVERY ‘explosion’ you saw.

NOT oxygen.

done here.


46 posted on 02/13/2014 7:29:26 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Osage Orange

The “no smoking, oxygen in use” signs are so some schmuck doesn’t have their lit cigarette burst into flames, ignite their clothes and hair etc etc.

But the OXYGEN never burns - it just helps other stuff burn or blowed up real good ;-)

BTW, your O2 cylinders are green, right? Or come out the wall from a tank elsewhere?


47 posted on 02/13/2014 7:55:00 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Arlis

Yes - increasing the O2 PPM or percentage of the atmosphere does indeed accelerate combustion. The reverse is also true.

The movie BACKDRAFT demonstrated the effect of suddenly introducing O2 to a hot fuel with a source of ignition.

I ‘hated’ that movie for one reason — They portrayed Fire Fighters as stupid - going into an active, enclosed fire with their gear open, (not even a balaclava or face shield) without a buddy, and no respirator/ rebreather etc etc.

Otherwise entertaining.


48 posted on 02/13/2014 7:59:51 AM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

Green and 02 flow meters out of the wall have green on them.....


49 posted on 02/13/2014 8:50:26 AM PST by Osage Orange (I have strong feelings about gun control. If there's a gun around, I want to be controlling it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag
And my point, and the point of other firefighters on this thread is that the TITLE is misleading.

I think we all agree on that.

I merely noted that OXYGEN is NOT flammable. PERIOD.

Yeah... it's inflammable. (a firefighter joke).

An Oxygen leak is WAY down on the list of concerns if the leak is outdoors.

Rather like a large burst of CO2.

The flammable/explosive gases on that truck were the cause of EVERY ‘explosion’ you saw.

I find that unnecessarily redundant, but at the least we can agree that the 'fuel' for those explosions was in those tanks.

NOT oxygen.

It was Russia, could have been just about anything. None of those pesky signs to deal with either.

done here.

Thank you for your response.

50 posted on 02/13/2014 8:26:53 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (I forgot what my tagline was supposed to say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson