Fuel cell

[martys748]

Anyone ever thought about putting a fuel cell in the Left side cargo compartment? and plumbing it into the filler neck just below.

 

[ygmn]

Anyone ever thought about putting a fuel cell in the Left side cargo compartment? and plumbing it into the filler neck just below.

sounds unsafe to me since it would be outside the frame rails....I am sure you could get a bladder type....but man I see more harm then good from this......

 

[sperry]

They run hot and they cost mucho$$$.

I wonder what a 2010 Avvy will look like? The base chassis of the GM HY-Wire is supposed to accept many platforms of the cars in that year. Hmmm maybe a truck fuel cell chassis too?

 

[martys748]

sounds unsafe to me since it would be outside the frame rails....I am sure you could get a bladder type....but man I see more harm then good from this......

well maybe but what isnt a risk, hell just putting fuel in the truck is a hazzard with all those idiots around you filling up and talking on the cell phone at the same time!! fuel vapors, high power static discharge, thats why there are signs that say no cell phones. not to mention the retards smoking.

the reason I ask is that I use a fuel cell on my motorcycle in addition to the tank for cross country runs I do.

As well I work for a helicopter manufacture and we make fuel blatters even bullet proff ones

 

[sperry]

I really doubt that cellphones are a fill-up hazard as they claim. The physics of static electricity and what a cellphone radiates are too different (RF/EMF vs. ESD). What it could do is couple some RF into the vehicle chassis and if you had a "dirty" coupling nearby, a "microspark" could occur in theory. 'Better to be safe than sorry if you have to I guess.
Gasoline could more likely drown out a cigarette butt than ignite from it! (Who wants to chance that!)
Static generated by filling up gas containers that are setting on a bedliner - Well, if I saw someone doing that, I'd get the hell away, even if it's raining!
All in all, no one can always outsmart those electrons, but if someone's pager beeps or their cellphone rings, I'm not one to run from it.
There's so much RF and static (RF/EMF & ESD) around that a cellphone's energy is dwarfed by it. Maybe they should consider the gas station's fluorescent lighting too!
I wonder how many folks who complain about ESD, stand in front of their MW oven while they are waiting for their yummy to cook.
$.02, keep the change.

 

[I CHNGE]

The danger of cell phone use while fueling is not related to static discharge or RF. The danger is caused by the cell phones battery. The batteries contacts can cause sparks which can and have ignited fuel vapors. The most common hazard occurs on very hot days when vapors from the filler neck area rise quickly and are coupled with the cell phone user standing directly over the filler nozzle/filler neck area. Next time you are at a gas station look at how many cell users stand right next to that area with cell phone resting on their shoulder and nozzle in hand filling up! On cell phones equipped with externally mounted batteries, this "on the shoulder" can rub the battery enough to "spark the contacts" resulting in the ignition of vapors. Now having said all this, it is my opinion that the conditions to create ignition must all be "lined up correctly" and the odds are against in most cases. None the less there have been enough documented cases for Chevron to post warnings. Shell is considering warnings. All gas stations currently have postings that prohibit the use of battery operated devices while fueling but the average consumer fails to draw the connection (sorry for the pun) between battery operated devices and cell phones. Last but not least are flash fires created by static discharges. I totally agree as mentioned above, if someone is filling a gas can in the bed of their truck or in the trunk of their car...run fast. There are many documented cases of this type of flash fire, and all stations post prohibitive warnings about such fueling scenarios. PUT THOSE CANS ON THE GROUND WHILE FILLING. Finally, If you walk away from your vehicle while fueling or get back inside your vehicle while fueling (neither is a smart thing to do), always, always make bare hand contact with the vehicles body prior to putting your hand back on the nozzle. This allows release of static charge build up which is a well documented cause of vapor ignition.

 

[Rltturn]

No joke about static discharge!!!!

When we do manage to get some low humidity, cool, days around here, which isn't often, sliding out on the cloth seats of my AV and making contact with the door will "light up your life" for sure.

In fact, it is so bad that I ground myself out to the metal on the door with my house key as I get out. Can't use the truck key because it didn't conduct well enough. Can't imagine how you guys in the colder climbs put up with such as that all the time.

Sooooooo---would never ever think about getting back in the vehicle while fueling on those days. Too big a risk when you have seen an arc from your fingers to the door before. And, I might add, the resulting zing!!

RLT

 

[DavidC166]

In Theory, I'll buy the cell phone safety hazard, but in reality I think that many more serious hazards could be found. If a microspark either from a keypress or the battery terminals were a concern, or if the EMF from the transmission were a problem, then public safety folks like police and fire woud be bursting into flames around the country.

I can't tell you how many times I've refueled a unit while talking on my radio. I know that Motorola claims that their Lapel Mics are "intrinsically safe", but that's only if they haven't been dropped or stepped on several dozen times. If a spark were the root cause, then pressing the PTT would certainly generate such a condition (same goes for the little FRS radios). If EMF/RF were a problem, then the 5watt units we used to use would certainly be more dangerous than a 0.2watt cell phone.

The documented cases that I've read all revolve around ignition when the cell phone RINGS. Could it be the micro-motor that vibrates the phone that's causing the spark ??

You generate a greater voltage from static buildup on your clothing than from a short across the battery. Many people create this buildup from getting back into the car while refueling and then getting out and grabbing the pump handle (discharging the static right at the handle) Let's not even talk about the people who don't shut off their engines while refueling !!

To: I CHNGE --- I'm not questioning your conclusion that battery terminal sparks are a cause, but just out of scientific curiousity I'd love a link to a report on that - something to share in my fire safety discussions

Keep it safe,
DavidC166

 

[I CHNGE]

First I must correct myself, there are no documented cases in the world of cell phone battery sparks causing fires. This according to several articles found in
www.pei.org/static/
web site. I stand corrected, however I will point out that studies were created regarding battery sparks not RF or STATIC CHARGES from cell phones. Also pointed out in the several reports on that web site (please read all to verify) Nokia and other cell phone companies printed warnings over the use of cell phones while fueling based on incomplete and incorrect data (my original source of the info).

 

[sperry]

Batteries don't "spark" while they drain or charge but bad contacts or internal connections do heat and spark. I would hope all know the hazards there.

In my profession, I covered many of these issues.
This is one of my articles I distribute to the users as to why there is a more expensive battery.
(Cut & pasted from a .doc file)
--------------------

Stephen C. Perry
Sr. Communications Technician
Orange County (CA) Sheriff Communications
October 15, 2002                                                                                                   

Re: Meeting with Multiplier Battery Co. Regarding Factory Mutual Approval and Intrinsic Safety.

Objective:

?   The clarification of OEM and after-market batteries coded with a "green dot".
?    Differentiating full FM certification, to that of "just" Intrinsically safe.
?   Legal risks, which need attention regarding the use of non-FM certified batteries that have intrinsic safety circuitry.
?   Availability of certified intrinsically safe after-market batteries.
?   Some details as to the procedures and guidelines after-market manufactures must follow to obtain the Factory Mutual Certification of any given product.

Explanations:

?   The United States Bureau of Mines had developed safety guidelines which depict protection of personnel utilizing certain equipment.
?   In this case, the focus is on equipment that could be an ignition source for trapped combustible gasses.
?   These are sources from static electricity, flame and friction sparks, as well as electrical arcing, plasma and sparks. The latter is the concern of this subject.
?   Two-Way radio equipment, during normal receiving and transmitting is considered "safe" (except for blasting and related scenarios). The concern is faulty equipment.
?   Faults range from bare metal antenna parts touching outside foreign conductive obstacles, on-off switches, relays, battery contacts and open/unsealed fuse filaments.
?   The latter is primarily where an "intrinsically safe" battery applies; these batteries sense overloading and "shut off" electronically to prevent the flash of a fuse filament, in the event of a short within the radio.
?   In some radio models, extra measures are taken to seal off the battery contact area, such as that designed into the Motorola XTS3000 and "Jedi" series radios. Note that this is not present on the Saber series and those models have an FM approval option.
------------------------
I havn't seen any FM batteries on cellphones! Anyone else?
I align with any safe procedure, even remote or hypothetical ones. The idiocy is that more prominant or dangerous ones are often overlooked.
..Back to the ridiculous:
Let's remove the battery out of the Av's and flashlights, and push the trucks to the electrically powered pump, lit by the rows of fluorescent lights! Remove your nylon garments.
..Forth to the not so ridiculous:
Anyone fueled aircraft? Vehicles are clip connected to one-another and/or grounded.
..It's just food for thought.

 

[Starwolf]

Did anyone watch the episode of "Mythbusters" on this deal? They tried all kinds of ways to get a cell phone to ignite gas vapors, even when the phone was sealed in a "room" filled with vapor and air. It never worked and the myth was busted! What they did prove was that it is the static electrical discharge that set off the gas vapor. And according to their research, it occurs mostly with women, and is caused by someone getting back in the vehicle while fueling up. Just my $.02.

 

[RIKrotorhead]

So, if I'm in Chicago, at that gas station on the lakeshore, and there is 15 feet of snow on the ground, and the wind is blowing at about 40 mile per hour accross the lake, and the wind chill factor is 8000 below, and I'm wearing shorts, t-shirt, and flip-flops,... does this mean I have to stand there and wait until all $60.00 worth of fuel goes into my tank, before I can get back in my warm AV?

I think I'll chance it. I'll touch my tounge to a steel pole before I touch the gas nozzle. I should be safe that way.

 

[dichris]

Cell phones, all have buttons and a lot of people like to push them, those electrical connections can arc thus giving you the necessary spark..
Also, what about the idiots that fill their jerry can sitting on the bedliner...... After dragging the can across the bedliner, they take the gas nozzle ( which is grounded ) and shove it in, only to have the jerry can discharge the static electricity through the nozzle...
Vapour and spark! No more idiot!

 

[ygmn]

Cell phones, all have buttons and a lot of people like to push them, those electrical connections can arc thus giving you the necessary spark..
Also, what about the idiots that fill their jerry can sitting on the bedliner...... After dragging the can across the bedliner, they take the gas nozzle ( which is grounded ) and shove it in, only to have the jerry can discharge the static electricity through the nozzle...
Vapour and spark! No more idiot!

Correct.....check out NEC code section 500 and 501 for explosion proof rules.....they have various coding....Division 1 and 2....1 is inside the environment all the time and div 2 is it can be in environment.....

They have various class too which is 1 and 2....which relates to environment.,...class 1 is gaseous etc etc 2 is dust.....

then there is Groups which is actual stuff that can explode .....such as Group D which is hydrogen such as from drilling offshore wells......

Other things can light off an explosion...such as surface temp...etc etc etc ...

but for most part explosion proof devices are such that they will contain an explosion within and not let the flame propagate out into the environment and getting catastophic......

UL tests for these things as well as other testing labs.....Canada has their own rules.....

There is a thing called intrincically safe which is covered in rules


Europeans have some rules as well...Ex and Eex are the start of their coding.....

 

[sperry]

A variety of comments just in this string, from only a few.. I wonder what the "outside" world thinks about the subject!

What'll happen when they start pumping hydrogen?

It's strange that the folks really believe that cellphone users will follow the warnings. I wouldn't be suprised of the number of units that have been in use without an incident too. Why don't they have intrinsically safe phones?

Anyway, wasn't this thread originally about fuel cells?

 

[Tree_Hugger]

This whole cell-phones-igniting-gasoline-vapors garbage started when a young female 'cub' reporter on the China Times was trying to find something for an article (any article) to actually get into print on the paper (a big deal for any trainee reporter) and asked one of the 'old hands for a suggestion. The guy was tired of young reporters asking him to do their work for them, and facetiously suggested this as a subject.
The young lady did no research (of course) and just wrote a toally bogus, but well written, article on the subject (crediting the experienced reporter as one of her 'sources').
Because she quoted one of their experienced reporters, the China Times published the article without the extra checks they normally perform on the work of trainees.
They have tried several times to kill the resulting 'urban myth'. It is unusually resilient, to the point of inspiring legislation around the world....

 

[Blue_03]

Anyway, wasn't this thread originally about fuel cells?

And the "Fuel Cells" of this topic is not the hydrogen fueled energy creating technology.

A "fuel cell" is the more modern term for a "gas tank" someone asked about putting another aux gas tank in the side storage. A fuel cell is really just a gas tank. (At least for this thread)

 

[sperry]

Hmmm, no wonder there's confuson, at least to me (that's easy). I always used "fuel tank" or "aux fuel tank".

Ill try this: APU: NASA term for Hydrogen Fuel Cell
Fuel Cell: (CAFCNA this thread & ? others): Another fuel tank.

Now that I'm hopefully on the right track, I'd like to explore the idea too; there's always that extra range that's peace of mind.

 

[I CHNGE]

hehehe
gas tank, fuel tank, fuel cell, aux fuel cell, aux fuel tank
man I'm getting a headache
and if you installed a bladder in the side storage bin what does that become?

 

[ygmn]

Bladders hold pee hehehehehehe

 

[RichUF]

Now there's an idea A bladder installed in the side compartment, plumbed to the cab, then you don't have to stop to pee...kinda like a mobile port-a-let! Heck, you could even have it drain out the bottom.

 

[I CHNGE]

ROFLMAO

 

[02-Z66]

i put enough gas in this thing as it is. i do not want to add to the bill. besides, the other members are right about the safety issue.

 

[02-Z66]

Now there's an idea A bladder installed in the side compartment, plumbed to the cab, then you don't have to stop to pee...kinda like a mobile port-a-let! Heck, you could even have it drain out the bottom.

 

[RIKrotorhead]

Now there's an idea A bladder installed in the side compartment, plumbed to the cab, then you don't have to stop to pee...kinda like a mobile port-a-let! Heck, you could even have it drain out the bottom.

When I was young and stupid, we used to fill the windshield washer tank with Ripple wine (barf), and route the hose to the inside of the car. No open container. Just stop at the liquor store for a fill-up. Stick the hose in your mouth, and press the button.
It's amazing we didn't kill anybody. Like I said, young and stupid.