Torch/regulator flash arrestor difference?

Is it possible to use a torch flash arrestor on the regulator side? I find it uncomfortable using the arrestors on the end of the torch. Since they
sell arrestors for both, I assume there is a difference.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is more common to have check valves on the regulator and flash arrestors on the torch.
Many torches have both built in.
--
"I love deadlines, especially the wooshing sound they make as
they fly by" - Douglas Adams
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I've never seen a flash arrestor on a torch. the things on torches are non-return valves.
The function of a flash arrestor is to cover your arse after you've screwed up. The screw up is to allow gas to mix in the hoses, which can then ignite. The arse-cover is to prevent such a (scary) flashback getting into the regulator or cylinder (fatal). There's little point in putting a flash arrestor at the torch end, because there's no "flash" to arrest - the torch has a thin wire mesh in there anyway and that's enough to stop the minor pops from a light-back to a dirty mixer.
The non-return valve on a torch is to stop the mixed gas getting into the hose in the first place. These have to be at the torch end, because there's no point in putting them upstream of the hose - they'd still allow gas mixing inside the hose. As they're intended for torch use, they're only made in one direction too - put them at the regulator and they'd simply be the wrong way round.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:30:26 +0000, Andy Dingley

Look right here:
http://www.jandrweldingsupply.com/store/Victor/TorchHandleDesign.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:09:00 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.com (Speechless) wrote:

Thanks. I'm in the UK - we rarely see Victor kit and I've not seen this pattern before.
The idea of "built in flashback arrestors" strikes me as merely pointless and just making the torch clumsy to handle. I don't like what little Victor kit I've seen and (like much American gas welding kit) it seems to me poorly designed and with bad ergonomics, compared to the UK kit. It looks like 1930s-1950s kit, with similar balance.
As to the claim "No need for acessory flash arrestors", then I'd regard that as dangerously misleading. The arrestors in the torch will do _nothing_ to improve safety from a flashback in the hoses, and that's the big accident you have to worry about.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 14:08:45 +0000, Andy Dingley

If you are wise, you will have two sets of flash arrestors installed:
AT THE TORCH: This is to prevent the flame front from working its way back into the hoses at the torch.
AT THE REGULATOR: This is to prevent the flame front from working its way into the regulator via a SEVERED HOSE.
To "save money", people economize by installing only one set of flash arrestors. If you have only one set, then the logical place to have them is where the flame is: AT THE TORCH.
Most people operate their torches with the tanks placed at arms length, which means that the hoses are not uncoiled and placed on the floor where they might be severed by a falling, sparking chunk of steel so, the compromise between cost and safety by not having flash arrestors at the regulators is deemed to be acceptable for the average user.
I, personally, do not go near a torch unless it has flash arrestors installed both at the torch and at the regulators -- my life is worth more than the cost of an extra pair of flash arrestors. Just my opinion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:17:15 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.com (Speechless) wrote:

Why would a flame from a burning acetylene hose propagate back through the regulator ? Nor will a rubber hose burning in oxygen.
Acetylene burning in air is just not an energetic reaction, in comparison to a rapid explosion of acetylene and oxygen mixture. Nor will pure acetylene burn. If your acetylene is at a high enough pressure to decompose on its own, then that's a different hazard.

No, this is a misunderstanding of what the hazard is.
The primary function of flash arrestors is to stop the _energetic_ explosion of a mixed gas explosion in a hose from propagating into the regulator and cylinder. It's not about a flame from a correct gas mix magically travelling back along an unmixed hose

Check valves at the regulators are pointless. They are unnecessary there (why would they be?) and they cannot provide the first-line safety precaution of avoiding gas mixing in the hoses.
Gas passages in a torch body are deliberately small, so as to limit the total energy possible in a torch-body flashback. Obviously this is not practical in long hoses -- one of our most important demands on safety is to avoid mixed gases getting into a hose. Torch check valves are important here, as is hose purging on startup.
--
Cats have nine lives, which is why they rarely post to Usenet.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 01:23:38 +0000, Andy Dingley

You are correct in what you say for combustion.
"Flame front" is a term often used by those who study the processes that take place at the fireball boundary in what a layman would call an "explosion". If a mechanical shock to a gas in a confined space is created, such as could happen if a sufficient amount of hose were impacted with sufficient force, an instantaneous pressure wave within the hose could be generated from the kinetic energy imparted. That pressure wave could compress the gas, in this case acetylene, and cause a localized spontaneous decomposition. The pressure wave, initially generated by kenetic energy, is then sustained by chemical energy derived from spontaneous localized decomposition as it propagates down the hose. This is not spontaneous decomposition of acetylene per se because the pressure wave acts on the gas mechanically to initiate decompostion by compression as the process proceeds down the hose.
I don't know if that clarifies it or not; however, I think we both agree that a flash arrestor should be installed at the regulator. Yes?

British practice is to install check valves at the torch and one set of flash arrestors at the regulators. The argument for having flash arrestors at the regulators is to prevent flashback in the hoses (no matter what caused it to be in the hoses) from propagating into the regulators and into the tank. This does not address safety issues arrising from leaving hoses unprotected from torch body flashback.
North American practice is to install one set of flash arrestors at the torch and check valves at the regulators. (The opposite of British practice.) The industry argument (not mine) for having flash arrestors at the torch is to prevent torch body flashback from propagating into the hoses, with the reasoning being that if the hoses are protected from torch body flashback, the absence of flashback in the hoses will also protect the regulators. Some consider this reasoning to be fallacious because the problem of flashback in the hoses being initiated by sources/conditions not attribuatable to torch body flashback is not addressed.
In short, neither the British practice nor the North American practice is perfect so, the evolving consensus on both sides of the pond is to recommend that flash arrestors be installed both at the torch and at the regulators, with the British appearing to be more vociferous about it as evidenced by the fact that this recommendation is beginning to appear in government sponsored safety publications in the UK.
Any torch I own has a set of flash arrestors installed both at the torch and at the regulators.

The industry argument (not mine) in North America is that check valves block the reverse flow of gas, so therefore, it doesn't matter which end of the hose they are on.
My personal opinion is that British practice is more sane and that check valves should be as close as possible to the location where gas mixing can be initiated, which means at the torch.
Any torch I own has check valves installed at the torch.

Agreed.
Correction...
Cats have nine lives because they always purge their hoses...not in my garden. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Is there any drawback, apart from extra cost and extra physical space, to having combination flashback arrestors and check valves at both ends of the hose? For instance, would it introduce enough extra constriction in the hoses so that the gas pressure drops too much between the regulator and torch?
Mike
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yes, provided you also have a set of flash arrestors installed at the torch. (See my other message in this thread.)
Please understand that we are talking about flash arrestors here, which should not be confused with check valves. You also need a set of check valves installed. The ideal location for check valves is at the torch but, in the interests of making the torch less cumbersome, check valves are commonly installed at the regulators.

You could:
a) Try to find a torch you like that has both the flash arrestors and check valves built in. These tend to be more compact but, not necessarily lighter in weight.
b) Try a torch design that might be more ergonomically suitable for what you are doing. I've heard a lot of favorable comments about the Dillon/Henrob/Cobra Torch from long term users but, haven't used it myself. People who spend a lot of hours per day with a torch seem to like it. Have a look at:
http://www.cut-like-plasma.com / http://www.cobratorches.com /

Flash arrestors are designed to permit the flow of gas in one direction only and to block the flame front from travelling in the opposite direction.
The only difference is whether there is a male fitting or a female fitting on the input side or output side of the flash arrestor. You CAN NOT remove a set of flash arrestors attached to the torch and mount them on the regulators (or vice versa) because this would orient them the wrong way and leave you with NO PROTECTION whatsoever.
If you are not familiar with torch plumbing, it would be wise for you to take it in to a factory authorized dealer or repair center licensed to modify gas torch apparatus to ensure that whatever it is you want done, is done properly. Unlike with bathroom plumbing, there is a lot more to know about torch plumbing than simply how to operate a wrench/spanner on some pipe fittings. You do not get a second chance to fix torch plumbing errors.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Official British version of how to work safely with acetylene:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg327.pdf
The article contains some interesting photos of what happens when an acetylene tank blows up.
Note that, unlike in North America, they recommend check valves be placed at the torch, and when one set of flash arrestors is in use, to place the flash arrestors at the regulators. In the event of a flash back, this protects the regulators and the tanks but, leaves the hoses unprotected. In the event of a flash back, this setup will prevent a lot of property damage, but does nothing to protect the torch operator from exploding hoses that can permanently maim, in the end, perhaps making the operator wish that the tank did explode and take him out with it.
To their credit, they too, advise using flash arrestors at both the torch and at the regulators.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.