Gasoline burner system

Tested a new gasoline burner I fabricated over the weekend, similar to Ron’s “shotgun burner” in design...with coils wrapped around the torch head for vaporizing. I installed an additional cylinder (exhaust pipe tip) over the torch and vaporizing coils to help hold in more heat. The vaporizing tubing is 3/16” nickel - copper brake line and the torch is a stock Harbor Freight propane “weed burner” with the vaporizing tubing wrapped around it and plumbed into the nozzle. Fuel delivery is supplied by the traditional method of compressed air “pumping” the fuel at around 80 psi (starting pressure). The gas and air tanks are from an air compressor that I had laying around with (2) cylindrical tanks that are stacked, one on top of the other, laying horizontally. I removed the fittings, inspected the insides and converted the top tank to an air vessel and the bottom one as a liquid fuel vessel. I reused the original check valved hose input, pressure relief valve, added a new gauge and left the pressure switch in place, although not connected, in case I want to use it to cycle a small 12vdc air compressor on and off to maintain a constant pressure.

The burner worked really well...but burned a little rich. When installed on the boiler, it will draw in secondary air and that should help. It also appears that it needs a few more wraps of vaporizing tubing, for it had trouble keeping up when the gas flow was pushed. All in all, it is a usable and good burner. I made a video of the test and will post it on my YouTube channel later this afternoon. Here are some pics:

Jamison

Jamison,

Good show. It needs more primary air. The hole where the fuel sprays through needs to be enlarged. Have a look at our mixing tubes for diameter suggestions. I would open it up to at least 1" to start. Ideally, a butterfly shutter to control primary air would be best. As you experiment with orifice size and fuel pressure you can adjust the primary air without remachining components.

Glad it worked out for you,

-Ron

Jamison,

To add: The fuel orifice size I would start out with a .035-.045" for gasoline, smaller for Kerosene, if that is the old Propane orifice it is likely too large for that. As the fuel type gets hotter, the orifice size decreases. For instance, Tony and I run about the same size burner, for gasoline, he's running (I think) .053" orifice, and I'm running a .040" orifice with kerosene, I was running a .042" orifice but had to downsize without a fuel automatic, it was popping off continually unless I was in a flat out run.

Also have a look at my highly detailed sketch , the holes in the inner sleeve is to allow flame to impinge on the vaporizer. No holes in the sleeve will insulate the vaporizer quite a bit, acting more like a heat shield. Wanna boil that fuel.

If you need an orifice that size, Call Tony, he likes making those

-Ron

Ron,

Thanks for the great advice, as usual. I figured the propane torch would burn rich running gasoline through it, but it was more of a test focused on vaporizing and the fuel delivery system. I will have to try the orifice sizes you recommended and get more heat on my vaporizer.coils. BTW...this burner system is for a large boiler I’m working on that will have 100’ of 1/2” stainless tubing for the main generating coil, so I figure a high output gasoline burner will be needed....possibly using a blower as well. I will start a new topic on this as it develops.

Thanks again,

Jamison

....almost forgot...here is a link to the video:

[youtu.be]


Jamison

I’ve been searching online for details about how to incorporate a blower in a burner set up. Doble came to mind, but not much info on the web about those burners. The best I could find was a neat old cutaway view of an E boiler, from the Virtual Steam Car Museum website. It shows some details of the fuel nozzle placement and some venturi type converging / diverging passages in front of it...but not much else. I believe a carburetor was used and there was no vaporizing, just atomizing. If anyone has some more details on this type of burner, please let me know. Picture below.

I have several small blowers on hand and a whole lot of gas engine carburetors....tiny ones from 3/4” bore weed wacker type engines to high performance, big block engine racing 4 barrel monsters. The one I think might be most compatible is from a ‘90’s See-Doo PWC. It has a really cool, German made 2 cycle, 2 cylinder engine and dual carbs....very high quality, Japanese made ones. The engine was rated at 85 hp. One of the dual carbs has a built in, diaphragm type fuel pump that works on crankcase pulses. I saw Zimirken’s video of his blower / carb experimentation, and read the discussion on this idea in his “steam scooter update” topic. A big help in the right direction was Ken Helmick’s comment on making sure the carb is on the suction side of the blower...not on the blowing side. I would have thought that the air moves in the same direction either way...but it is designed for suction and will not work otherwise. I guess some experimenting on my own is in order....uh oh...time to alert the neighbors and local fire department...

Jamison

If you don't want gasoline in your fan, and want to put the carb downstream of the blower, you'll have to make some adjustments to the jet. My carb did have a pressure equalizing tube going to the upstream of the venturi, but it didn't do a good enough job. I was going to look at drilling out the jet but I couldn't get ahold of drill bits for it before I got bored and switched back to looking at pellets.

Surely what you need to do to run the carb downstream of the fan is to find a way of subjecting the float chamber to the same fan pressure, otherwise the fan pressure on the jet will mess up flow of fuel from the float chamber.
This was what Mercedes did for their 7 litre blown racers in the late 1920's, the 38/250 etc.

Mike

Captain obvious here, but what about this?

-Ron

Hey Jamison,
I want in on "Captain Obvious" too! What about this??

Kind regards,
Rick H.

Not to be outdone, what about this?

Blower could be shut off, once steam pressure is up. Yes it will burn like that. Steam is a gas, won't condense in the combustion chamber.

-Ron

Ohhhh...I love a challenge! Especially the Captain Obvious one

How about this? The Blower became a Compressor and is driven by a Turbine, self sufficient and no electric power required. Combustion chamber includes the Boiler.







Note an error in sketch, turbine is drawn in the opposite flow rotating direction...you get the idea!

Rick, that's called a Velox boiler. Also called a P-fired or Pressure Fired boiler. Of course, you need an electrically powered blower to start the whole thing from cold iron.

Not to be persnickety, but it looked like the burner test was pretty good. Just need to experiment with orifice size and maybe add some holes. Not sure how a blower and carburetor would compare or why it's being discussed, my guess not well as carburetors atomize (and intake manifolds typically vaporize), vaporization as the burner was doing in the video is the route to best burn.

-Ron

Rick and Ken,

I like the jet engine-esque approach with the turbine driven compressor. It reminds me of an idea I was considering with the LaMont lawn tractor project...a “turbo LaMont” as I called it. With that idea, the recirculation pump was powered by an external turbine run off the steam output of the boiler. The project I’m working on now involves uses internal turbines to help with circulation and is not dependent on it to function. Kind of a naturally circulating system with a forced recirculation “booster” built in. So much for “keeping it simple”...but it’s not as complex as it may sound....AND most importantly....it will work without it. Ken...it’s partially based on your suggestion of powering the recirc pump with a water turbine running off the feed pump flow. The pump and turbines are both inside the drum and do not exit out to atmospheric, no troublesome high pressure / temps seals needed, and every force that enters or exits the drum adds to its rotation. Ceramic bearings are used throughout...they do not require lubrication (well...according to the manufacturer) and can handle boiler temps. I already have most of this part of the system fabricated and will elaborate more in a separate topic.

Rick's idea would work without the need for an electric blower to start by using a simple propane burner for start up, not unlike how Tony G does in his buggy. Once the Ofeldt built up enough steam...the forced air system could kick in and take over. Not sure how an Olfeldt / monotube hybrid would work, though...but Rick has some good ideas and look forward to hearing more details on that system.

Ron,

I just watched the burner video again, and I believe you are right. That thing was a fire breathing monster and like you said, a little tweaking on the orifice size and / or air passages and it would make a mighty fine burner for a boiler. I believe I will stick with that design for now...and if for some reason it ain’t hot enough...will cross that bridge when or if I come to it. It just seems that most modern, high performance steam automobile systems use a blower for combustion and with 100’ of 1/2” tubing to heat up, plus another 100’ in economizer / preheat, my thinking was I would need a forced air burner to go with it.

Here’s an idea: What about having a separate air nozzle that is plumbed into the top (air) tank of my gasoline system...that is controlled by a regulator or needle valve...that introduces a tweakable amount of pressized air to the mixing tube of the burner...or...simply adds air to the fuel nozzle (post vaporizing)? The air would inevitably contain gasoline vapor as well...for better or worse. My main concern with that is running out of air pressure before running out of fuel...a potentially dangerous situation...but as long as it is monitored closely and the rate of air flow is controlled it might make the burner air / fuel ratio adjustable for the best possible flame. Let me know what you think.

Jamison

Quote: "What about having a separate air nozzle that is plumbed into the top (air) tank of my gasoline system...that is controlled by a regulator or needle valve...that introduces a tweakable amount of pressized air to the mixing tube"

That would empty the air reservoir very quickly. And could be dangerous as well, if the air to fuel vapor mixture became proper somehow. Boom.

The air pressure in the fuel system is creating the velocity from the orifice along with pressure built in the vaporizer from the boiling fuel. To make it adjustable and steady, simply put an air regulator in between the air tank and the fuel tank. Then the air tank can be taken to any allowable pressure and the regulator controls the fuel pressure at a set amount. I do that with my main fuel and pilot fuel, it requires two regulators - one for each fuel tank, the main fuel is set to ~50 and the pilot fuel is ~15 psi. Works a treat, don't have to worry about fuel pressure dropping as the fuel level drops in the tanks, it remains rock steady which means steady performance.

Will that burner make steam? Oh yeah, the orifice size determines the BTU output, although theoretic, determine the amount of fuel per hour that can pass through the orifice by volume and then use the BTU/gal for that fuel type and you can arrive at an approximate BTU rating. The flame as long as it is burning properly as it is intermittently in your video (Blue transparent with yellow tips) will yield somewhere close to that amount of heat. Gasoline has a much higher BTU rating per gallon than Propane, all flame is not equal, some fuel simply burns much hotter than others. A good comparison is a propane torch and a MAPP gas torch, although the fire looks somewhat similar and somewhat close to the same size, the MAPP is about 2 - 3 times hotter.

-Ron

Ron,

Never mind about forced air, carburetors, etc....I took your advice and increased the i.d. of the mixing tube opening and added some 1/4” holes on the back of it. I kept the fuel nozzle orifice at its original size for propane...I would rather add more air than reduce the amount of fuel...and also added a few more wraps of vaporizing tube. The result was a large, almost invisible light blue flame that took very little warm up time to start vaporizing. I don’t think I even need a propane heater / pilot...by keeping the small needle valve barely cracked it spits out enough gas to flame up inside the torch head (at cold start) to vaporize sufficiently to get it started, kinda like an old fashioned gasoline torch or Coleman stove, then opening the valve very slowly gets it ready to go. For relighting purposes, the gas flow could be turned down to that small flow spot that just makes a small orange flame that only licks outside the burner about three inches or so. I believe this burner system is complete now and ready to make some serious steam. Here are some pictures of the changes, the last one is the small flame used for start up / relighting:

Jamison

Way to go, Jamison! Beautiful blue flame.

If you get any trouble with carbon in the vaporizer, check the fuel temp just before the jet, maybe with a laser thermometer pointed at the jet or vaporizer line. Below about 400F should not "crack" gasoline into carbon. If it is too hot, remove or insulate a bit of vaporizer tube in increments until it runs cool enough. Some years ago Jim Crank mentioned that he did this in his Stanley, and never had carbon trouble again. A petroleum engineer told him the target temperature.

Peter

[www.mcmaster.com]

Temperature indicating crayon from McMaster Carr. Put a dab of this on unheated part of fuel vapor line just before jet. If it melts, vaporizer is too hot for gasoline. No melt, no carbon.

Peter,

Thanks for the tip...I have a infrared thermometer that could read those temps, I will try that first. Those temp indicating crayons look handy, though....might have to order some in different ranges. Carbon build up is a concern, especially with the small tubing I’m using. Will try the Jim Crank technique of insulating in small increments to get it nailed down.

I finished editing and uploaded the new video of the completed burner...here is the link:

[youtu.be]

Jamison

Jamison,

Good going, looks to be burning much better now.

The high low flame is exactly how Locomobile and others first did their burner control and within a year or two added a standing pilot. Turning the flame down very low may not be very reliable or practical as it could especially with outside air currents cause it to burn back to the orifice making a return to stable burn impossible. High fuel mix velocity inhibits that.

Incidentally, George Whitney used the fuel line through the up one and down the other fire tube for fuel vaporization sort of like Locomotive superheating. I'm quite sure this made the burner very slow starting, but it probably served to stabilize the vaporizer temperature once steam was raised to temperature.

Carbon in the vaporizer. The vaporizer can be cut down to a point where their is very little carbon production, but it's going to make firing up much more difficult until the vaporizer gets up to temperature. That is why I like the OFeldt vaporizing scheme where the pilot does 90% of the vaporizing, the only pitfall there is stopping for long periods of time, it will start to make carbon. No Parades. Otherwise, carbon is not much of a problem especially burning straight kerosene, it has a much higher cracking temperature. As I understand it, almost all modern day pump gasoline has some ethanol and that is what is making more carbon nowadays. One thing to keep in mind, premium, higher octane fuels vaporize at considerably lower temperatures. Adjusting the pilot does allow for rate of vaporization changes. I haven't played with it that much to find out how, I'd rather drive it

I like that burner, it's relatively simple and it is a good platform to experiment with, with different fuel types or blends of fuel, Kerosene and fuel oil/diesel are the best to use from a heat standpoint - more carbon atoms per molecule and all that rot. With some multiple tanks and proper orifice you could start it on gasoline and then switch over to kerosene etc. It's perfect for these tightly wound long monotubes that you guys are using.

-Ron

Great videos Jamison; think I'd have to make a deal with some University of Texas film students to make videos that good. Excellent music, editing, and captions. The changes in the flame color when moving from low to high firing rates point out the advantages of 1900-1925 era steam car vaporizing burners with more mass/hysteresis in the vaporizer tubing. IE, thick wall tubing with some stored heat energy to vaporize an increased fuel flow before the firebox radiant heat increases. With thin-wall tubing, we see the vaporizing rate "lag" during times of fire increase/decrease, what IC car engineers call "transient conditions".

Ron, correct me if needed, but i'm thinking a shorter/lighter vaporizer tube would have less metal mass and would warm up faster and easier. Am I missing something? "Excuse please, but..." as my hero, famous detective Charlie Chan, would say, with Confucian politeness and sincerity.

By way of correction, if I recall correctly Jim Crank ran his Stanley on "K-1" top grade kerosene. Expensive and hard to find in quantity today. For gasoline, fuel cracking/carbon-deposit temperature might be lower than the 400F he was advised to use for 1-K kerosene. Ethanol content of motor fuel has generally & gradually increased, but I have seen at least 2 reports of extended no-carbon running with straight "gas station" pump gasoline in tuned-vaporizer Stanley burners. These reports, at this and/or the SteamGazette [John Woodson] internet forums, were recent enough that the ethanol content of the fuel was not much lower than today's levels. I will try to search for them. I have seen and heard first-hand reports of vaporizer carbon with "pump gas", but these involved fuel mixing [eg, gasoline/diesel/kerosene mixes] and/or no mention of vaporizer temperature tuning.

I did some calculations on pre-1914 Stanley "gasoline-only" and Ottaway burners, for "23 inch/20HP" burners, and found that both used almost exactly the same fire-side surface area for vaporizer tubes. In spite of the different design and metal of the vaporizer tubing -- mild steel for early Stanley & 300-series stainless steel [lower emissivity/radiant-heat-absorption] for Ottaway vaporizers.

Peter

[steamautomobile.com]

Interesting older Forum thread about vaporizing burners.

Peter



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2018 05:28AM by Peter Brow.

Pete,

Quote: "Ron, correct me if needed, but I'm thinking a shorter/lighter vaporizer tube would have less metal mass and would warm up faster and easier. Am I missing something?"

That it is correct, the pilot will heat a short vaporizer more quickly, If that is all that is required, problem solved. The issue with a shorter vaporizer comes in when the fuel starts flowing and the pilot can no longer keep up, this is where the main burner starts doing it's job and heating the majority (95%) of the vaporizer over the burner grate, vaporizing the cold fuel entering the vaporizer. Now, the pilot really isn't relied upon to do all the vaporization - it can't, the burner is. So it is a small window to get the vaporizer up to temperature and reliable. What this results in is multiple start attempts, the burner keeps going back to liquid, fires etc. Can't have it both ways, fast starting and low carbon production, pick one. Can't have lower heat transfer surface area and faster overall production.

Vaporizing independent of the fire is a much better route as Ofeldt did and Doble apparently worked with. The Heat can be controlled and adjusted for different fuel types.

-Ron

Hi Jamison,
The coveted "Tip-of-the-Hat" to you! Just wondering the angle on the exhaust of the burner. My thinking is this is an interface to a sheet metal drum where the boiler starts. I'm guessing this will create a swirl much like a Foundry Furnace?

I'm thinking your burner puts out at least 200K BTU in a tight package. As you are probably already thinking, placement of boiler generating tubes is important and that they are kept filled with water.

Also, I do recommend a propane pilot. Working with gasoline only, can lead to an intense burnout/flame. You have seen the Vanderbilt Jay Leno video and seen Stanley's that had this happen. I attached some pictures of the pilot for my burner for my Gentleman Speedy Roadster.

Hey Ron...I win the Captain Obvious competition However, nice advice to Jamison to keep on track with this gasoline burner. This deservers higher recognition.

Tony uses a propane pilot, Ron uses backpacker stoves (2 of them) running on Coleman Fuel and most Stanley's that I have seen use the Coleman Fuel or Hepthane; all in their pilots. Your choice...again, recommend a pilot light for your burner for safety.

One last thing, think about a blow-down nozzle to put your burner out, immediately and for safety. It is in my plan for my burner on my Stanley H. Sometime I'll tell you the story of Tony and I going down the street with our butts on fire.

Kind regards,
Rick

Quote: "Also, I do recommend a propane pilot. Working with gasoline only, can lead to an intense burnout/flame."

Hey Rick,

Same here, I would add the pilot as sketched and the holes as sketched. The low flame in the video would be blown out easily from wind turbulence on a moving vehicle. A well wind-shielded pilot is a vital thing to have for reliable ignition. Interrupted fuel flow (drop of water) can lose the fire and the hot metal surfaces can reignite reintroduced fuel and not very elegantly Think somewhere in between a cherry bomb and an M-80. Been there It's one thing to get a burner working well on the bench, then it has to work well subjected to ~60 mph winds from all angles. I solved that problem with vertical vanes in between the branches that direct cross-flow air straight up with the fire. Stanley type burners being sealed up don't have these issues as much. When I build another OFeldt burner, I'm going to resolve it during construction.

On another note, Tony and I took a hot ride on my Loco once when a copper pilot line broke. Two things, don't use copper for fuel lines, only use PTFE stainless braid and have a contingency plan in place, make it automatic to shut the valves on the fuel tanks. I've even considered a lanyard near the drivers seat that can be pulled to cut the fuel. Metering jets at each fuel tank like White used can mitigate fire danger as well. Remember, the fuel system is much more dangerous than the steam system. Both can be very safe if handled properly.

-Ron

Thanks for your input, everyone...I’m new at liquid fuel burners / vaporizing and I want to do this safely. A constant pilot flame, blow down steam fire extinguishing and flexible stainless braided fuel line would be wise to implement. Rick, you mentioned that you estimated the torch puts out about 200,000 BTUs....but as a propane torch it put out 500,000 BTUs, and I’m using the same size nozzle orifice as the propane and the same torch head....but with a hotter fuel and more primary air drawn in, wouldn’t the output be over 500,000 BTUs? I definitely want this torch to be hotter.
The torch will fire the boiler on the tangent, the angled torch head (actually an exhaust pipe tip) makes a good match for that. Here are some pictures of the new boiler shell with the torch head, the last one shows the shell on the back of the lawn tractor for perspective (and possibly an application) ...and the two drums on the right will be incorporated with the new boiler as well:

Jamison

500,000BTU - about the same as the 23" burner on a Stanley Steamer - I think your lawn tractor might fly!!

Mike

The confusion is the Propane torch was never 500k BTU. When it was first mentioned, I questioned how it could be, first off a 20 pound cylinder only has a vaporization rate of ~70K BTU per hour, it would require about a 300 gallon tank to keep up. Think about it in realistic comparison, 100k BTU is enough to heat a small home in the dead of winter. Other comparisons, a burner on a gas stove is around 12k, a water heater burner is about 30k.

Retailers for these sorts of items, don't offer honest ratings, the ratings are to make it sell. Cheap Hydraulic jacks are another item that is marketed with highly embellished ratings. Simple math of fluid pressure times the surface area of the ram face proves it easily.

Another indicator, there wasn't enough primary air to burn a few 100 K gasoline, but there was enough for the 500k BTU of propane? It needs ample air to burn as well, It wasn't 500K BTU. My guess is it was around 100k starting up and when the vaporization rate was slowly exceeded it tapered off to around 50K.

I agree with Rick, The burner as it is, about 200 K.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2018 08:24AM by IronChief.

Ron,

With all due respect, every (non-regulator) weed burner torch I could find for sale on the internet advertises the same 500,000 BTU output for their torches using a 20# tank. I understand that the 500,000 BTU number is the maximum output...not a sustained one. Perhaps a full 20# propane cylinder in mid summer Desert Valley, CA, sitting in the sun all day will provide that output for 5 minutes or so, then tapering down as the pressure drops to the 50-100,000 BTU range you mentioned. Pictured below are screen shots of several manufacturers claims. The last one is from McMaster-Carr...a source I know you trust:

My point is, if the torch itself is capable of a 500,000 BTU output ...albeit with (unrealistically) ideal propane tank pressure, level, temps and conditions for a short period of time...then with gasoline running at a steady pressure / flow should be higher than 500,000 consistently...being a hotter burning fuel. No pressure drop or tank freezing to lower output, same orifice and even pulling in more air...same torch.

Jamison



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2018 10:46AM by Arch-Tone.

All files from this thread

File Name	File Size		Posted by	Date
640C5047-6B78-47A5-B045-F4F00A84FBF4.jpeg	957 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/16/2018	Read message
96A28C2C-17CD-41F1-8D11-37905D634D9E.jpeg	684.2 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/16/2018	Read message
36ADD9C9-456E-4D50-A58A-4C7AC9BE114F.jpeg	576.5 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/16/2018	Read message
867A82F5-F7A4-43E1-9D0F-E413EF16E0A3.jpeg	1008.3 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/16/2018	Read message
2725071C-B274-48F5-B770-5A5D44AD6B99.jpeg	721.1 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/16/2018	Read message
shotgun burner.jpg	124.8 KB	open | download	IronChief	07/16/2018	Read message
C3D8EBEC-A9CE-4570-A750-D6C42B544FA5.png	469.3 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/18/2018	Read message
induced.vacuum.jpg	87.1 KB	open | download	IronChief	07/19/2018	Read message
Captain Obvious.jpg	181.7 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/20/2018	Read message
induced.vacuum.steam.jpg	101.3 KB	open | download	IronChief	07/20/2018	Read message
Captain Obvious Challenge.jpg	504.2 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/21/2018	Read message
0FBC4EF8-3A45-488F-A161-47726163E31F.jpeg	403 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/21/2018	Read message
6D7426B8-4941-46D7-BE60-8729779ECF9B.jpeg	424.7 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/21/2018	Read message
E48CAB66-FFDD-4731-B01F-A99F15B2547D.jpeg	207.2 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/21/2018	Read message
F22D2F95-4B6C-40D8-A6D0-61DBF2DCE420.jpeg	542.5 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/21/2018	Read message
IMG_1276.JPG	81.8 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/22/2018	Read message
IMG_1277.JPG	74.7 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/22/2018	Read message
IMG_1279.JPG	108.7 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/22/2018	Read message
IMG_1280.JPG	116.4 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/22/2018	Read message
IMG_1284.JPG	92.7 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/22/2018	Read message
IMG_1285.JPG	99.3 KB	open | download	Rick.H	07/22/2018	Read message
6017E3FE-E953-4AB6-BE02-2D3C077DA1E0.jpeg	664.7 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/22/2018	Read message
83BF5277-AE68-465B-A380-1008D360D5BF.jpeg	590.3 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/22/2018	Read message
0BC90872-14E9-4FEE-8F79-8483F63B0332.jpeg	744.8 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/22/2018	Read message
5C63A818-486E-4518-A00F-FCDB30B8D75B.jpeg	294.4 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/23/2018	Read message
BB73683C-2180-4227-A967-FC326E2C09C9.jpeg	195.1 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/23/2018	Read message
273195EF-A22B-419C-9B27-8882EDA2B062.jpeg	185.3 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/23/2018	Read message
AFC19B7B-2A0C-4EB7-B3E0-E687204F45A2.jpeg	245.9 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/23/2018	Read message
37D4D97C-F034-4DB9-A3B7-994B6E8A0176.jpeg	113.2 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/23/2018	Read message
6F41BBB0-5E25-49A7-8A59-B2FB091A2981.jpeg	563.7 KB	open | download	Arch-Tone	07/23/2018	Read message