Has anyone seen the news on refueling fires? Does anyone have any ideas on what solid measures can be taken to mitigate this problem? and Why isn't anyone asking " What's wrong with the gasoline?"
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Refueling fires Why?
- Thread starter fuelstat
- Start date
TheBlacksmith
Mechanical
1) I support Ivymike. It's less flammable and would instantly increase our CAFE numbers at least 25%.
Back to the question;
1) Pumping gas is inherently a dangerous undertaking, like driving, etc, that many people take for granted and become careless/distracted/stupid. No need to be afraid, but they should show some care and respect and ensure the nozzle is grounded to the vehicle, not try to squeeze 12.5 gallons into a 12 gallon tank, ensure the nozzle is off before removing it from the vehicle, etc.
2) The internet/news media, etc. providing complete and exacting stories on every incident, making it appear to be an epidemic, without normalizing it against number of cars on the road today, billions of gallons pumped, etc.
Blacksmith
Back to the question;
1) Pumping gas is inherently a dangerous undertaking, like driving, etc, that many people take for granted and become careless/distracted/stupid. No need to be afraid, but they should show some care and respect and ensure the nozzle is grounded to the vehicle, not try to squeeze 12.5 gallons into a 12 gallon tank, ensure the nozzle is off before removing it from the vehicle, etc.
2) The internet/news media, etc. providing complete and exacting stories on every incident, making it appear to be an epidemic, without normalizing it against number of cars on the road today, billions of gallons pumped, etc.
Blacksmith
Some people will try to muddle your head with physics equations and talking about "static discharge" and "vapor pressure" interactions, but those in the know will admit that these are merely the latest proof of an epidemic of Spontaneous Human Combustion (SHC) sweeping our country! Write your congressman today!
(With toungue firmly in cheek)
(With toungue firmly in cheek)
- Thread starter
- #5
I was hoping to get a more informative dialog going here? This problem has been on the increase since 1995. What changed in 1995? Could it be that EPA fuel policy could be wrong? How will ethanol affect this problem? Warning people with dramatic news stories via television may help a little?But long run? Where in the clean Air act amendments of 1990 is safety mentioned or even considered?
Perhaps one possibility is the increased availability of low rolling resistance tires, which (I'm told) contain less carbon/graphite than standard tires, and thus don't conduct electricity as well. Less conduction -> more static charge -> more zaps per mile.
I'm curious what your source of info is for the claim that the problem has been on the rise since 1995... was there a lack of reporting prior to 1995? Maybe the increase in ESD reports is partially due to the increased popularity of the internet?
TheBlacksmith
Mechanical
Okay, possible causes, which would require extensive research to validate -
1) The low rolling resistance tires increasing static buildup. I remember one OEM low resistance/low carbon tire being recalled due to excessive static buildup.
2) Increasing efforts to reduce air pollution from fuel evaporization may have concentrated vapors and resulted in an increase in vapors during refueling when the tank is unsealed by removng the cap.
3) Reformulated fuel may exhibit lower ignition requirements.
4) I still like carelessness - alot of the articles I've seen involved getting in and out of the car during fueling (door switches and static), talking on cell phones (are the buttons explosion proof?) and other activities. I have seen people in the car or on the pump smoking, but are they going to take responsibility and admit it?
Blacksmith
1) The low rolling resistance tires increasing static buildup. I remember one OEM low resistance/low carbon tire being recalled due to excessive static buildup.
2) Increasing efforts to reduce air pollution from fuel evaporization may have concentrated vapors and resulted in an increase in vapors during refueling when the tank is unsealed by removng the cap.
3) Reformulated fuel may exhibit lower ignition requirements.
4) I still like carelessness - alot of the articles I've seen involved getting in and out of the car during fueling (door switches and static), talking on cell phones (are the buttons explosion proof?) and other activities. I have seen people in the car or on the pump smoking, but are they going to take responsibility and admit it?
Blacksmith
- Thread starter
- #9
Ivymike , Your point on tires is very good , But that is only part of the problem , A further point is there was prior reporting on this in 1988 . The CAS Center for Automotive Safety , Clerance Ditlow's group put of D.C. published a document on the need to control gasoline/Alcohol blend volatility. I am no fan of the CAS, But that document points out very serious issues with respect to blending alcohol and gasoline. In 1994 we enacted the 1990 CAA and the fires started , the people investigating these fires have found out that many of thes fires were not reported as static ignitions. Fall , Winter and Spring is when most these fires occur. It is my opinion we need to re-examine the fuel formulations?
OK fuelstat, sorry to be flippant. I guess it's evident that I'm not overly alarmed at this 'problem', but it certainly is possible.
Why so quick to implicate the gasoline?? Like ivymike, I have heard attributions to increased use of silicones in tires making them more insulating, and that seems a plausible factor to me.
Any time low dielectric liquids are pumped through transfer lines they can build up static charge. Folks who handle flammable chemicals in industry are quite familiar with simple "grounding and bonding" procedures that prevent the types of accidents you describe. Such countermeasures could be offered to consumers, although ensuring consumer education and compliance would be a challenge. Some states such as New Jersey outlaw self-serve pumping, and maybe that's not a bad thing.
There are also antistatic additives that can be put in the fuel that may reduce buildup. If the consumer were willing to pay the one- or two- cent premium for it, that could form part of a solution that would certainly please the additive manufacturers.
Ethanol has a much higher dielectric constant than gasoline, so it seems like using it for an oxygenate could also reduce static buildup. But gasahol is a whole other can of worms . . .
Why so quick to implicate the gasoline?? Like ivymike, I have heard attributions to increased use of silicones in tires making them more insulating, and that seems a plausible factor to me.
Any time low dielectric liquids are pumped through transfer lines they can build up static charge. Folks who handle flammable chemicals in industry are quite familiar with simple "grounding and bonding" procedures that prevent the types of accidents you describe. Such countermeasures could be offered to consumers, although ensuring consumer education and compliance would be a challenge. Some states such as New Jersey outlaw self-serve pumping, and maybe that's not a bad thing.
There are also antistatic additives that can be put in the fuel that may reduce buildup. If the consumer were willing to pay the one- or two- cent premium for it, that could form part of a solution that would certainly please the additive manufacturers.
Ethanol has a much higher dielectric constant than gasoline, so it seems like using it for an oxygenate could also reduce static buildup. But gasahol is a whole other can of worms . . .
- Thread starter
- #11
Blacksmith , Your point regarding carelessnes is well taken , but fuel policy with respect to fuel formulation and who is filling the cars needs to be taken into account . EPA needs to be taken to task on their fuel policies. They are not very well thought out...
GregLocock
Automotive
If it is a big deal why not fit an earthing strap to the nozzle, that contacts the car's body before the nozzle itself, or rather better, why not have whippy earthing straps sticking up from the forecourt, which would ground the car as you drive over them (OK I've thought of one reason why that might not be so good). Incidentally do those funny little earthing straps that dangle from the bumper prevent these accidents? Cheers
Greg Locock
Greg Locock
- Thread starter
- #13
Drwebb , I do not think your flippant ,And I don't want you to think that I am implicating the gasoline. I happen to think it's the best stuff dollar for dollar one can use to propel their transportation. I am pointing out that the Idiots at EPA who tell the refiners how to blend fuel need to be taken to task. Dare I say "They know not what they do."
You are correct that the people in the business are very aware of the problem and take appropriate measures. It is also true that educating the public sufficiently would be a daunting task. Todays society is in far too much of a hurry to properly get the message. Which is exactly my point. Outlawing self service might be an idea but I don't think the motoring public would appreciate the additional cost.
Refueling fires are on the rise and unless you know someone who has ben a victim of this problem where you personally effected by it , well...Further grounding and bonding are not enough in these cases . The fact is they need to lower the RVP of the fall , Winter and Spring fuels. This could significantly reduce the vapor clouds that develop outside the vehicle filler tube during refueling. Vapor recovery is no panacea either. Some companies are removing the auto-locks from the fuel nozzles to keep the person refueling in contact with the refueling process and hopefully they will not re-enter their vehicle until the process is completed, This still is no assurance to prevent the problem. The anti-static additives you mention are interesting can you name one that is approved for use in ground transportation fuel? I only am aware of their use in jet fuel and how well they work is suspect. In the case of alcohol improving fuels conductivity , this is true . However it raises the RVP of the fuel and thus increases the vapor cloud problem. One point further , simply improving the conductivity of the fuel is not the way you deal with static electricity , you have to have some place to conduct to . Todays modern fuel systems are in short supply of areas of conductivity.
Please see
Kind Regards Mike
You are correct that the people in the business are very aware of the problem and take appropriate measures. It is also true that educating the public sufficiently would be a daunting task. Todays society is in far too much of a hurry to properly get the message. Which is exactly my point. Outlawing self service might be an idea but I don't think the motoring public would appreciate the additional cost.
Refueling fires are on the rise and unless you know someone who has ben a victim of this problem where you personally effected by it , well...Further grounding and bonding are not enough in these cases . The fact is they need to lower the RVP of the fall , Winter and Spring fuels. This could significantly reduce the vapor clouds that develop outside the vehicle filler tube during refueling. Vapor recovery is no panacea either. Some companies are removing the auto-locks from the fuel nozzles to keep the person refueling in contact with the refueling process and hopefully they will not re-enter their vehicle until the process is completed, This still is no assurance to prevent the problem. The anti-static additives you mention are interesting can you name one that is approved for use in ground transportation fuel? I only am aware of their use in jet fuel and how well they work is suspect. In the case of alcohol improving fuels conductivity , this is true . However it raises the RVP of the fuel and thus increases the vapor cloud problem. One point further , simply improving the conductivity of the fuel is not the way you deal with static electricity , you have to have some place to conduct to . Todays modern fuel systems are in short supply of areas of conductivity.
Please see
Kind Regards Mike
patprimmer
New member
Lotts of things have changed, from continual increases in the amount of synthetic fibre in clothes, to the use of plastic fuel tanks. Tyre formulations, paint formulations, average vehicle speeds prior to refueling, reduced time between highway speed and refueling, expotential increase in electronic and electrical devices, tank venting systems, increased reporting, increased # of refueling events, self serve fuel, familiararity with, and therefore, dimminishing respect for the hazzardous chemical that fuel is.
I expect the real answer would take a very long and detailed study. Regards
pat
I expect the real answer would take a very long and detailed study. Regards
pat
Pat---"---familiarity with, and therefore, diminishing respect for the hazardous chemical that fuel is."
How about the clowns that tried to syphon gasoline from their car with an electric vacuum cleaner (Lakewood, California c.1983)? Need I expand on the results?
Question Fuelstat---Do the refueling fires seem to be spread equally around the globe or, are they restricted primarily to one or two areas? I saw a clip on the ABC news just the other night about this phenomenon(?) and it was the first I had heard of it.
Rod
How about the clowns that tried to syphon gasoline from their car with an electric vacuum cleaner (Lakewood, California c.1983)? Need I expand on the results?
Question Fuelstat---Do the refueling fires seem to be spread equally around the globe or, are they restricted primarily to one or two areas? I saw a clip on the ABC news just the other night about this phenomenon(?) and it was the first I had heard of it.
Rod
- Thread starter
- #16
patprimmer
New member
I wouldn't expect any auto manufactures to be in a hurry to recognise the problem. As I understand it, in most western countries, if you are unaware of a problem and do nothing, you are not nearly so negligent as when you are aware of a problem and do nothing. ie Tobacco company execs and the dangers of smokeing, and the airlines with "deep vein thrombosis". Regards
pat
pat
- Thread starter
- #18
- Thread starter
- #20
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
