Clean It Up
UK Window Cleaning Forum => Window Cleaning Forum => Topic started by: David Beecroft on April 12, 2016, 06:42:32 pm
-
Good evening, I'm in the market for a new 500litre tank.
Much is made of "crash tested" cages and the safety implications, however I am yet to be convinced as I have yet to see actual facts and figures. Yes like everyone else I've seen you tube videos of crash testing but they don't show a comparative test of a tank strapped down by heavy load ratchet straps attached to the cargo hooks which are bolted to the floor. The motor industry use ratchet straps to secure 2 ton cars on the back of transporters and nobody seems to think that's unsafe. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to be set straight but give me hard evidence not a sales pitch. ???
-
Any restraint is only as strong as it's weakest point. Metal is affected by corrosion accelerated by pure water. The load points are metal. Most crashes are relatively low speed and the straps would probably be fine.
That one day when you are travelling at forty to fifty and the car coming the other way at the same speed hits you. You will have a brief moment to think of that half a tonne behind you that's now been magnified in force to several tonnes heading towards you.
I'd have the cage because I'm a wimp, but a live wimp.
If you have family, get the cage.
-
You've hit the nail on the head there as it's not so much using ratchet straps but what they are connected to if the load remains still secured on an impact or not. Some for convenience attach the ratchet straps to those poxy spot welded loading eyes in the rear of the van but most will likely rip off in a collision.
-
Now that's exactly what I mean. Surely, what you quite correctly say about the weakest point and metal corrosion, is just as true regarding the fixing points of a cage, except you're actually increasing the weight of the load by adding all that stainless steel. If the fixings are the same the only difference would be the stress load on the webbing as compared to the welding points on the steel frame. Convince me. ???
-
I should add that I'm driving a Connect and the 6 fixing points are factory fitted 12mm bolts through the floor. :)
-
Hmmm, both vans & any I buy would have a factory fitted bulkhead. Logically, this should be as good as bolts through the floor. No?
-
Yes I would have thought so, my Connect also has a factory fitted steel bulkhead. :)
-
Hi David
You need to restrict any possible chance of movement by creating a barrier around the tank particularly around the base front and rear. These can be held in place using M12 Bolts and Spreader plates the straps would then attach to the base providing a safe load. This DIY method simply replaces the upper frame section with the straps, however frames also provide the opportunity to fix controllers, pumps, filters etc. I always used DIY systems but now use Grippamax.
HTH
John
-
I had my first grippamax system installed in 2014.
850L system.
A The van drives like it's not carrying water.
B The frame work and tank is heavily over engineered.
C Everyone claims to earn £10000000's cleaning windows so 3-5 k on a system is nothing.
-
I had my first grippamax system installed in 2014.
850L system.
A The van drives like it's not carrying water.
B The frame work and tank is heavily over engineered.
C Everyone claims to earn £10000000's cleaning windows so 3-5 k on a system is nothing.
Completely agree I have a grippa system and don,t regret spending the money on it one bit.
The fact the tank handles so well and is crash tested is one of the reasons I choose grippa.
I have a full steel bulkhead in van in the event of a crash ever happening I want to reduce the risk to my self and others as much as possible. So a fitted system was the only option.
-
I'm really unsure whether ratchet straps or a bolted through the floor system would be safest. However my grandchildren decided that come Xmas they would rather have smaller presents this year than none next year!
Tank, cage, spreader plates and decent bolts - professionally fitted - you only get ONE chance.
-
Yes I would have thought so, my Connect also has a factory fitted steel bulkhead. :)
david i have a connect and i had a brand new 500L upright tank and frame fitted for £100(local bodywork specialist garage).have it fitted lengthways in the van(so you dont overload the axles).
£400 for wydale tank and steel frame(cleaning warehouse)
£100 fitting so £500 altogether.
you dont need to spend a lot to get a secure tank in the back of your van but anything over 500L id get a grippamax/pure freedom/xline set up.
the thing is theres no point in fitting an all singing,bells and whistles system if you have a second hand van thats say 5-10 years old.if its brand new van and you plan on keeping it for 10-15 years then maybe.
im lucky as my tap tds is 029 so a simple DI system is all thats needed.
ive spent a lot more on poles/brushes/goosenecks than i have on tanks/pumps,controllers etc(around 3k).
i do very little mileage as my van is just used for work(2500-3000 miles a year)so i cant justify buying a brand new van and professional fitted system.
-
Yes, fit it lengthways so the tank can fly through the brackets. ;D
-
Buy a pick up...
-
Yes, fit it lengthways so the tank can fly through the brackets. ;D
its the best way dave in my van for even distribution of weight and no overloaded axles.its solid.had it 2 years now and im very happy with it.cheap too.
-
Hmmm, both vans & any I buy would have a factory fitted bulkhead. Logically, this should be as good as bolts through the floor. No?
Yes at least it should keep you dry when your pinned between it and the steering wheel, 650lt tank would go through it like
a pen through paper.
There's nothing 100% safe but I wouldn't have ratchet straps about me with the weight I carry, remember if you lose one
fixing point with a steel cage still have another three holding the frame, lose one with ratchet straps and you only have two.
See how easily a tank can move when one of the ratchet straps is removed.
Just make sure the cage is bolted to plates under the floor and not directly to the floor as that would be no better than straps.
-
I had my first grippamax system installed in 2014.
850L system.
A The van drives like it's not carrying water.
B The frame work and tank is heavily over engineered.
C Everyone claims to earn £10000000's cleaning windows so 3-5 k on a system is nothing.
Completely agree I have a grippa system and don,t regret spending the money on it one bit.
The fact the tank handles so well and is crash tested is one of the reasons I choose grippa.
I have a full steel bulkhead in van in the event of a crash ever happening I want to reduce the risk to my self and others as much as possible. So a fitted system was the only option.
Thank for all your mentions of our brand and your experience with it.
We would also add that water is an unstable load, and the velocity of the water traveling unpredictably in an accident is one of the key reasons to a properly designed and professionally fitted system. This system should be both accredited and manage the water correctly amongst a number of different features.
Please do let us know if we can help any further.
-
I have a 1000l tank in my Renault Twizzy with only one bungy strap. Had it five years now and it's never moved. ..............,........ Off the drive. Cheap too.
-
I do love the posts where people say they haven't had a problem with their tank that is held down by
A cage made by a mate down the pub
The bulkhead
Ratchet straps through the luggage loops
A bungee cord held down at the other end by a canary
etc, etc.
The only time you'll know if you have a problem will be as the tank comes through the bulkhead and the last thing to go through your mind will be your arsehole.
Vin
-
"There's nothing 100% safe but I wouldn't have ratchet straps about me with the weight I carry, remember if you lose one
fixing point with a steel cage still have another three holding the frame, lose one with ratchet straps and you only have two."
Now thats the first thing anybody's said that makes any sense.
Everyone else is just repeating sales talk thats persuaded them to part with extra cash, I notice nobody has made any reference to comparative tests between steel cages and industrial ratchet straps.
If they exist I would be keen to study them.
Just to be clear, I am not advocating anyone taking stupid risks, better safe than sorry. But lets have the facts not waffle. :)
-
Mine is in a cage AND ratchet strapped, it's like wearing 2 condoms if you get my drift
-
Most people that strap tanks in do so for one main reason and that is it's cheaper.
Safety dosn't come in to it.
With a crash tested system the manufacturer has invested time and money to see how that system performs in a crash.
Straps Are used in the heavy transport industry I'm sure their fine but then again I don't know the facts I'm not the expert.
I'm sure if straps were completely safe for installing tanks then one of the brands would have brought a cheap value range out that you strap in your self but no one has.
-
I had my first grippamax system installed in 2014.
850L system.
A The van drives like it's not carrying water.
B The frame work and tank is heavily over engineered.
C Everyone claims to earn £10000000's cleaning windows so 3-5 k on a system is nothing.
Completely agree I have a grippa system and don,t regret spending the money on it one bit.
The fact the tank handles so well and is crash tested is one of the reasons I choose grippa.
I have a full steel bulkhead in van in the event of a crash ever happening I want to reduce the risk to my self and others as much as possible. So a fitted system was the only option.
Thank for all your mentions of our brand and your experience with it.
We would also add that water is an unstable load, and the velocity of the water traveling unpredictably in an accident is one of the key reasons to a properly designed and professionally fitted system. This system should be both accredited and manage the water correctly amongst a number of different features.
Please do let us know if we can help any further.
and you have poof of this ??? if so you will be sending all your finding to all the van makers in the world as your bound by duty of care laws to do so ????
-
Most people that strap tanks in do so for one main reason and that is it's cheaper.
Safety dosn't come in to it.
With a crash tested system the manufacturer has invested time and money to see how that system performs in a crash.
Straps Are used in the heavy transport industry I'm sure their fine but then again I don't know the facts I'm not the expert.
I'm sure if straps were completely safe for installing tanks then one of the brands would have brought a cheap value range out that you strap in your self but no one has.
eddie stobart ships millions of tonnes of cargo using just straps in every thing from ships of transit connects I guess they know a thing or two a bout straps
-
Don't suppose they sit about four inches in front of a ton load with no protection though. Most have two bulkheads between them and the cargo.
-
Personally with an upright tank I think the strapping angles are all wrong for ratchet straps. The centre of gravity is high and the strapping eyes are generally too thin and too close to the tank, but then I know nothing.
-
eddie stobart ships millions of tonnes of cargo using just straps in every thing from ships of transit connects I guess they know a thing or two a bout straps
The difference is that, in an accident, a 40 ton lorry will decelerate at a much lower rate than a small van. It's the deceleration that will cause a load to break whatever it is that might be holding the load back.
Vin
-
I think sensible precautions should be made.
Couriers carry all sorts of stuff in the backs of their vans and use the provided D-ring or similar strapping points. Said vans have a payload. So in simple terms if you have a 1000kg payload you might well strap a heavy metal motor (e.g.) in the back that weights say 500kg.
Builders carry cement mixers, battery suppliers carry lorry batteries, garages have drums of oil delivered.
I don't hear of many incidents of loads letting go and killing occupants when these loads have been strapped down as per guidelines.
I believe the guidelines are that if you have a manufacturer's fitted bulkhead the heavy object should not exceed half the payload if placed against the bulkhead and strapped down to the eye points.
... ...
My tank and assembly when full probably weigh 720kg (Payload 1070kg) and so I have taken greater precautions.
As for me I had four pieces of angle iron (75mm x 75mm at the front and sides and 110mm x 110mm at the back), welded into a frame so that my flat 650L Wyedale tank could sit "in" it and so that the tank's upper forward edge touched the factory fitted bulkhead.
The two baffle "holes" in the tank each have a 5 tonne ratchet strap wound round the 110 x 110 mm angle iron three times and ratcheted taut.
The angle iron has several M16 high tensile bolts through the floor to spreader plates or lengths of 75 x 75 angle iron underneath. This has all been rustproofed and undersealed.
I believe that this is sufficient for everyday driving.
-
Good post mr gold,
In the event of a crash that frame work will be the least damaged part of the van.
Momentum is the key, baffle the tank and up against the bulk head and no matter the impact the tank can not move forward. Flat tanks are safer than upright due to low centre of gravity.
Only when you start putting the tank in the centre of the load area do you invite problems as that meter of space is where the tank decodes a deadly object.
Bolts and speaker plates will give very good anchor points so if the tank is in a cage or strapped it's not going to move.
But alas, it's a repeating subject that neither side are willing to concede the others valid points, just extreme theoretical situations where quite frankly anything other than an Abrahams tank could not survive.
Darran
-
Don't suppose they sit about four inches in front of a ton load with no protection though. Most have two bulkheads between them and the cargo.
I remember this case very well................
http://www.ppconstructionsafety.com/newsdesk/2009/01/30/moving-loads-safely/
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/local-news/company-fined-150k-after-lorry-6968482
To the best of my knowledge, i'll stand to be corrected.............it was not infact sheet steel, it was steel tubes. They where strapped down. They where loaded shy of the bulkhead, and of course slid and came through. This could of been avoided by loading against the bulkhead, and from my recollection of posters and advice given in the docks at the time that was the recommendation.
So, what that mean for our water tanks ? I've never seen any fitted a different way, they all rely on a strong frame, hoping it does not distort, and a bolt and spreader plate through the floor. A one size fits all scenario. In the event of a good bump, you'd be lucky for it not to rip and distort the floor, effectivley writing the van off. Of course, you'll be safe (ish) , hopefully.
Just why any of the existing tank "installers", and thats basically all any of them are, do not utilise the vehicles own strength and incorporate the tank fitting into the existing bulkhead,or prefabricate some sort of bulkhead in the form of bars from pillar to pillar where not only is it safer and stronger, its less likely to damage the vehicle is beyond me. They all just follow suit and bolt and spreader plate through the floor.
Some people laugh at ratchetted in tanks, and same people pay a fortune for safe systems standing isolated in the middle of the back of their van. The same system that goes in ANY van, and thinks they've got a good deal. Probably the same people who are spending a fortune on pads and discs as they carry "a heavy load", that sort of mentality.
-
I don't think a thin bulkhead would hold it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnFyMqPER3g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrbvYwVQWZw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9usI6qFzfpo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w56cXOXtrrk
-
I have a 350-liter tank held down with 3 5 tonne straps and I check it every year to see if its holding and if it moved. Never a inch out of it. They are connected to the Ford Connect standard points in the van and never a problem. My van does have a factory fitted builkhead.
-
Never had a problem lol you mean you've never had an accident to find out if there's a problem
-
How safe are pickups?
Do they need mounting too, it or are they safe enough strapped in?
-
I don't think a thin bulkhead would hold it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnFyMqPER3g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrbvYwVQWZw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9usI6qFzfpo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w56cXOXtrrk
Problem with that video is its for sales the non grippa tank appears to have no restraint at all, it's also allowed to travel to the cab if already against a bulk head then it would not breach it, as clean clear pointed out the best way would be a second bulk head using the vans structural pillars
Darran
-
I don't think a thin bulkhead would hold it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnFyMqPER3g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrbvYwVQWZw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9usI6qFzfpo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w56cXOXtrrk
Problem with that video is its for sales the non grippa tank appears to have no restraint at all, it's also allowed to travel to the cab if already against a bulk head then it would not breach it, as clean clear pointed out the best way would be a second bulk head using the vans structural pillars
Darran
The video you are referring to of the 'tank fail' is the very first prototype crash tested system we sent along for exploratory testing of designs and to start to understand the forces involved in restraining a system.
It really does look catastrophic and is if there was no restraint at all - however that is definitely not the case. It was a modular tank design with 850litres of water in it with screw-on lids. It did have a restraint system which weighed about 90kg and was very securely mounted into the van. It was a low-level perimeter frame mounting system (as favoured by many DIYers) along with restraint bars through the moulded centre of the tanks - these were all fixed with 16mm bolts through floor into spreader plates under the floor. We learned a lot from this 'failure' and used it to greatly improve subsequent designs and MIRA tests.
What happened in the accident-test was:
1. The tanks collapsed under the weight of the water (this was despite being tank standard 6mm thick polythene) - this was because despite feeling very strong the tank itself is flexible in a crash and without full height restraint at the front can move too far forward.
2. Due to the collapsing pressure of the water the lids were blown off and the tank ripped apart.
3. Then under the strain of this forward movement the restraints bolts and spreader plates (1/4 the size of the current ones) started moving forward and sliced through the floor pan like a knife through butter destroying several cross members as it slid through them.
4. The system had moved completely out of the cargo area, through the cab area and then the forward moving water ripped through the engine bay bulkhead.
At the time I was not very pleased with the end result >:( - however as a learning tool it was invaluable and taught me a new respect for carrying such a concentrated (most of the vehicle's load in just a 1/6th of its load area) and fluid (as in its ability to change shape) load.
What we did learn has been incorporated into the current Grippamax systems:
Non-Modular increased strength tanks
Burst-proof lids
Low level tanks
Full 'honeycomb' baffling
Full height restraint system
T-Bar front and rear restraint bars with large bonded spreader plates
There are of course many different ways of securing a tank of water in a van - it is always up to each user to risk assess their load, the van and their method of fixing. As long as they are happy with their choice then that is all that really matters (as long as they do not have an Employee sitting next to them :-X )
-
Like i said in my interview with Lee.
The reason i went for the grippamax system is because the frame work bolts to the tank. In one of those Ionics videos you see the frame crack and the tank move. A simple DIY fame may not be up to the job and could fail easily.
-
and what [people also forget if you drill chassis of a brand new van and don't get it sign off via the main dealer it can and sometime will viod warranty on the van ,
we had this when I rang v.w. uk when we were fitting the truck mount in the t5 it was a night mere to get it pasted ,
-
Thats a very enlightening video of the crash test Alex, I'm sure you did learn a lot from it. However the load was in the middle of the cargo area and there was no bulkhead. If there was a bulkhead and the tank was tight up to it, hence support for the upper portion of the tank, what would the results have been?
As I said before I'm here to be convinced, I'm not being sceptical for the sake of it. ???
-
Can't find anything about the safety of carrying a tank in a pickup. There are 2 bulkheads that should help.
I've been tempted to get a pickup route for over a year now, and this thread has got me a little worried about my strapped 650 tank in a vivaro
-
The video you are referring to of the 'tank fail' is the very first prototype crash tested system we sent along for exploratory testing of designs and to start to understand the forces involved in restraining a system.
It really does look catastrophic and is if there was no restraint at all - however that is definitely not the case. It was a modular tank design with 850litres of water in it with screw-on lids. It did have a restraint system which weighed about 90kg and was very securely mounted into the van. It was a low-level perimeter frame mounting system (as favoured by many DIYers) along with restraint bars through the moulded centre of the tanks - these were all fixed with 16mm bolts through floor into spreader plates under the floor. We learned a lot from this 'failure' and used it to greatly improve subsequent designs and MIRA tests.
What happened in the accident-test was:
1. The tanks collapsed under the weight of the water (this was despite being tank standard 6mm thick polythene) - this was because despite feeling very strong the tank itself is flexible in a crash and without full height restraint at the front can move too far forward.
2. Due to the collapsing pressure of the water the lids were blown off and the tank ripped apart.
3. Then under the strain of this forward movement the restraints bolts and spreader plates (1/4 the size of the current ones) started moving forward and sliced through the floor pan like a knife through butter destroying several cross members as it slid through them.
4. The system had moved completely out of the cargo area, through the cab area and then the forward moving water ripped through the engine bay bulkhead.
At the time I was not very pleased with the end result >:( - however as a learning tool it was invaluable and taught me a new respect for carrying such a concentrated (most of the vehicle's load in just a 1/6th of its load area) and fluid (as in its ability to change shape) load.
What we did learn has been incorporated into the current Grippamax systems:
Non-Modular increased strength tanks
Burst-proof lids
Low level tanks
Full 'honeycomb' baffling
Full height restraint system
T-Bar front and rear restraint bars with large bonded spreader plates
There are of course many different ways of securing a tank of water in a van - it is always up to each user to risk assess their load, the van and their method of fixing. As long as they are happy with their choice then that is all that really matters (as long as they do not have an Employee sitting next to them :-X )
We tread a fine line between securing a load in our vehicles and "fitting a system" in our vehicles? All similar in principle, but legally miles apart. The fitting of any system i've ever seen would not meet the legally required standards for securing a load.
I'll just do this loosley..........
A load is required to be restrained to the load bed, its also required to be against the bulkhead of the vehicle, if this is not possible, due to weight distribution or other, then physical obsticals should be put in place to ensure contact with bulkhead. The load should also not be capable of moving backwards (heavy acceleration).
A fitted system doesn't attract so much scrutiny. Like i said, most if not all are secured to the load bed through a series of bolts and spreader plates. So, where's the mystery, where's the magic, what makes the "proffesional fitted system better" ?
Well from what i can make out it all relys on a strong frame, bolted through the floor etc.. there is none of that "make sure the load cannot come foreward, so secure it against the bulkhead", as it appears at least in a physical sense at least, its not needed. The securing to the floor will suffice. For a fitted system............................
The amount of posts around this topic never fails to amuse me. "your safety", "think of your family", "A tonne of water behind your head"........etc. But in all them crash test videos i ever saw, the drivers legs where broke, his rib cage crashed in etc....and everyone wants to rave on....................the tank frame retained its integrity. Sure it did, that's what it was designed to do, in every vehicle.
-
Well, the vehicle manufacturer is in charge of protecting the occupant as much as he can. The tank fitters can only protect their product really. In many vans if you shove an upright tank up against the bulkhead then the weight distribution is probably unbalanced - passengers, engine and load all shoved to the front. The worrying thing is the damage the liquid caused in the failure film - ripping the tank apart. I think Alex said it damaged the engine bay bulk head :o
It's up to us to secure our tanks as best we can but there are tested systems out there just seems daft to become overnight engineers and fit our own with straps and bits of wood when there are better alternatives.
You wouldn't pass a risk assessment on many fittings I've seen - you'd refuse to drive it.
Many refuse to climb a ladder to pull a tuft of grass out because it's so dangerous, they walk away from the job, climb back in the van and drive off in a death trap ;D
-
Well, the vehicle manufacturer is in charge of protecting the occupant as much as he can. The tank fitters can only protect their product really. In many vans if you shove an upright tank up against the bulkhead then the weight distribution is probably unbalanced - passengers, engine and load all shoved to the front. The worrying thing is the damage the liquid caused in the failure film - ripping the tank apart. I think Alex said it damaged the engine bay bulk head :o
It's up to us to secure our tanks as best we can but there are tested systems out there just seems daft to become overnight engineers and fit our own with straps and bits of wood when there are better alternatives.
You wouldn't pass a risk assessment on many fittings I've seen - you'd refuse to drive it.
Many refuse to climb a ladder to pull a tuft of grass out because it's so dangerous, they walk away from the job, climb back in the van and drive off in a death trap ;D
So this raises another side of the issue, Insurance. Does a fitted system, ie Grippamax/Ionics, become a vehicle modification whereas using the existing bulkhead and fixing points simply mean load carrying? Where do the Insurance compamies stand on all of this?
-
Sorry I meant to quote the previous post from Clean Clear. :)
-
Good question. My Insurance company wanted to know who installed the tank when I declared I carried 650l of water. I didn't ask any questions.
-
My insurance when i started was cheaper because i had a system from ionics , i believe ionics must have met somebody from the insurance company to explain about the crash testing etc .
We all know insurance companies are con artists though , especially the no claims thing!
I now have a grippa tank and for me the its about what i think is less likely to hurt me in an accident .
-
If you're carrying 600 litres of water it weighs 600Kg. In a typical 30mph accident you're likely to experience 20-30g. So, at the upper end of that range:
One way to look at it is to imagine your van with a full tank of water standing on its nose and having a weight of 17,400*kg pushed down on the tank. If the tank's up against a bulkhead or held with ratchet straps then you're fine if it will withstand this much force. If not, it'll move. This is just physics, not opinion.
The forces unleashed in an accident are much larger than you'd expect.
Vin
* Two old-style Routemaster buses would tip the scales at 15,000Kg. So if your ratchet straps or bulkhead can withstand the weight of a couple of double deckers with about fifteen people on board each one, you'll be fine.
-
I think the whole tank in a cage thing needs to be re thought .
If the water is stored in a solid plastic tank ( always the case) it becomes more of a dangerous weapon in an an accident.
If the water was in a collapsible bag like tank . It would collapse on impact . You would just get wet! Better than squished.
Just my thoughts .
Tris
-
How safe are pickups?
Do they need mounting too, it or are they safe enough strapped in?
Mine just sits in the Tub. The insurance company is aware and quite happy in that it's no different from carrying anything else of size and weight. Advantage is that there are two , independent steel bulkheads protecting the occupants and that the tank is unable to move due to it's location.
-
That swings it for me.
My decisions now are... a) which one? b) 2nd hand or lease?
Current thinking is 2nd hand Navara or Hilux for around £7500.
But that's another matter
-
That swings it for me.
My decisions now are... a) which one? b) 2nd hand or lease?
Current thinking is 2nd hand Navara or Hilux for around £7500.
But that's another matter
The Navara is a very nice truck but be very careful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VnUSFPQQVg
The Hilux seems ok
The Ranger I would vouch for through 4 years experience and the attitude of local, tame mechanics.
-
I think the whole tank in a cage thing needs to be re thought .
If the water is stored in a solid plastic tank ( always the case) it becomes more of a dangerous weapon in an an accident.
If the water was in a collapsible bag like tank . It would collapse on impact . You would just get wet! Better than squished.
Just my thoughts .
Tris
You would get much more than wet , water moving with that speed and force will hurt you , possibly kill you .
In Alex's earlier post the tank that failed and shed its water, the force of the water ripped through the engine bulkhead .
-
OK, Thanks for everyone's input. I started this thread to get honest information regarding the need or otherwise for cages to be fitted to tanks for safety, these are my conclusions from what everyone's posted.
1. We all want to be safe in the working environment but like many issues in life the risks and consequences of a course of action can be played upon to "sell" us something, whether its a product or an idea. The perfect example is the mobile phone, how we now feel vulnerable, even unsafe if we set off on a journey and we've forgotten it when we all managed for most of our life without one.
2. The arguments in favour of the safety fitted systems could be applied to any substantial load a tradesman carries in his van.
3. If the load, (500ltr water tank) both base and top, is tight up against a factory fitted steel bulkhead and properly secured according to the vehicle manufacturers instructions and fittings so there is no movement. I'm happy to feel reasonably confident.
4. While in certain circumstances a fully fitted "over engineered" system would make good business sense, the purpose of any business is to make profit for the owner not the suppliers to that business. So good business management suggests we must cut the cloth according to what is needed.
These are just my conclusions and not recommendations, everyone has to make up their own minds. I hope I haven't upset anyone and thanks to all who made serious comments. The more we communicate the better our industry will be. ;)
-
If you earn close to what many on here claim, spending an extra £1000 or so on e.g a grippa system which will give many years of service is actually a very minor outlay.
-
OK, Thanks for everyone's input. I started this thread to get honest information regarding the need or otherwise for cages to be fitted to tanks for safety, these are my conclusions from what everyone's posted.
1. We all want to be safe in the working environment but like many issues in life the risks and consequences of a course of action can be played upon to "sell" us something, whether its a product or an idea. The perfect example is the mobile phone, how we now feel vulnerable, even unsafe if we set off on a journey and we've forgotten it when we all managed for most of our life without one.
2. The arguments in favour of the safety fitted systems could be applied to any substantial load a tradesman carries in his van.
3. If the load, (500ltr water tank) both base and top, is tight up against a factory fitted steel bulkhead and properly secured according to the vehicle manufacturers instructions and fittings so there is no movement. I'm happy to feel reasonably confident. Indeed you can drive with a light heart as long as you're confident of your bulkhead's ability to withstand the weight of a couple of lightly loaded double deckers.
4. While in certain circumstances a fully fitted "over engineered" system would make good business sense, the purpose of any business is to make profit for the owner not the suppliers to that business. So good business management suggests we must cut the cloth according to what is needed.
These are just my conclusions and not recommendations, everyone has to make up their own minds. I hope I haven't upset anyone and thanks to all who made serious comments. The more we communicate the better our industry will be. ;)
-
Who says the tank won't go through the bulkhead? Someone on the internet or Mira or an Engineer?
I think your mind was made up before you asked to be honest I don't think you wanted to spend the money to make your van as safe as possible. Your choice of course but I'd rather do everything possible to make mine safe even if it cost money. I can't rely on a hunch that it won't move or some bloke on the internet saying his is safe even though he's fitted it the wrong way round and relies on an inch deep lip to hold it back.
You can't take that chance in my opinion. If my family or an employee got injured at least I know I've tried all I can within my power to make it as safe as I can.
-
Someone (probably Vin or Matt, cause they're so insightful) once said that during a gold rush it's the guy selling the shovels who makes all the money.
-
I found this report in my search, it makes interesting reading (I'm only up to page 30!). It clarifies some of the issues regarding panel vans securing loads. I made the comparison between HGV and LGV load securing , this report explains why you can't compare the two. It also talks about load positioning in relation to bulkhead and the difference between home made bulkheads and factory fitted (crumple zone) bulkheads. It makes the point that an unsecured load in the middle of the load bed as compared to one secured tight up to the bulkhead becomes 10x its own weight at a 30mph head on collision. I think there's something in this for everyone on each side of the argument.
http://www.fta.co.uk/export/sites/fta/_galleries/downloads/loading_of_vehicles/technical_reference_on_cargo_restraint.pdf
-
I think we can all agree that this is sheer lunacy!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/WINDOW-CLEANING-VAN-BRODEX-SYSTEM-WFP-WINDOW-CLEANING-/272213172048?hash=item3f612b5f50:g:rDEAAOSwFNZWyycx
-
I found this report in my search, it makes interesting reading (I'm only up to page 30!). It clarifies some of the issues regarding panel vans securing loads. I made the comparison between HGV and LGV load securing , this report explains why you can't compare the two. It also talks about load positioning in relation to bulkhead and the difference between home made bulkheads and factory fitted (crumple zone) bulkheads. It makes the point that an unsecured load in the middle of the load bed as compared to one secured tight up to the bulkhead becomes 10x its own weight at a 30mph head on collision. I think there's something in this for everyone on each side of the argument.
http://www.fta.co.uk/export/sites/fta/_galleries/downloads/loading_of_vehicles/technical_reference_on_cargo_restraint.pdf
I saw that the other day. It supports my feeling that a tank strapped up against a bulkhead is a safer option than one with a homemade frame away from the bulkhead. Ofcourse, if it was in a frame and against the bulkhead it would be safer still.
-
I found this report in my search, it makes interesting reading (I'm only up to page 30!). It clarifies some of the issues regarding panel vans securing loads. I made the comparison between HGV and LGV load securing , this report explains why you can't compare the two. It also talks about load positioning in relation to bulkhead and the difference between home made bulkheads and factory fitted (crumple zone) bulkheads. It makes the point that an unsecured load in the middle of the load bed as compared to one secured tight up to the bulkhead becomes 10x its own weight at a 30mph head on collision. I think there's something in this for everyone on each side of the argument.
http://www.fta.co.uk/export/sites/fta/_galleries/downloads/loading_of_vehicles/technical_reference_on_cargo_restraint.pdf
Heh, I have that page bookmarked from a while ago. I used some the information therein to help decide which water tank restraint to use.
-
From that document (section 5.1.2):
"In the DfT Code of Practice (2002) it is recommended that cargo should be placed next to partitioning
systems. In the absence of not having any purpose designed restraint system to restrain the cargo (e.g.lashings, racking systems etc.) then placing cargo next to the partitioning system should still be considered a minimum Best Practice (Assuming the barrier is designed and engineered to accommodate the forces generated in an accident)."
So up against a bulkhead is regarded as a minimum and it assumes the bulkhead is designed for the purpose.
Ah well, it's your lives not mine.
Vin
-
From that document (section 5.1.2):
"In the DfT Code of Practice (2002) it is recommended that cargo should be placed next to partitioning
systems. In the absence of not having any purpose designed restraint system to restrain the cargo (e.g.lashings, racking systems etc.) then placing cargo next to the partitioning system should still be considered a minimum Best Practice (Assuming the barrier is designed and engineered to accommodate the forces generated in an accident)."
So up against a bulkhead is regarded as a minimum and it assumes the bulkhead is designed for the purpose.
Ah well, it's your lives not mine.
Vin
No need to be patronising, but in any case it says in the "absence" of lashing systems. In my opinion (and it is no more scientific than yours) a few bolts through a cage and through the floor of a van with a 800 litre tank are unlikely to restrain it in a head on crash. If it breaks through those bolts it's going to hit that bulkhead at 10x its own weight, whereas if it's already against the bulkhead the force is reduced.
Again, I may be wrong (although the report quoted tells me I'm not totally wrong) but it just feels inherently safer to have the tank strapped to the bulkhead than in a cage. It actually isn't the cheapest option as a bulkhead costs more than an aftermarket cage.
-
No need to be patronising, but in any case it says in the "absence" of lashing systems. In my opinion (and it is no more scientific than yours) a few bolts through a cage and through the floor of a van with a 800 litre tank are unlikely to restrain it in a head on crash. If it breaks through those bolts it's going to hit that bulkhead at 10x its own weight, whereas if it's already against the bulkhead the force is reduced.
Again, I may be wrong (although the report quoted tells me I'm not totally wrong) but it just feels inherently safer to have the tank strapped to the bulkhead than in a cage. It actually isn't the cheapest option as a bulkhead costs more than an aftermarket cage.
The system I have has been tested. No "feelings" involved. Just an experiment where someone drove a van with a tank full of water into a concrete block at 30mph. The tank didn't go flying. Forgive me if this next phrase is patronising but that experiment is rather more scientific than a "feeling" about a bulkhead.
I've argued this till I'm blue in the face and I normally leave repetitive threads well alone. However on this subject I generally put my neb in because there's just a chance that someone might do something that could save their life one day.
Buy a crash tested system for a couple of thousand quid, keep it for ten years and it'll have cost you about 80p a working day.
Vin
-
No need to be patronising, but in any case it says in the "absence" of lashing systems. In my opinion (and it is no more scientific than yours) a few bolts through a cage and through the floor of a van with a 800 litre tank are unlikely to restrain it in a head on crash. If it breaks through those bolts it's going to hit that bulkhead at 10x its own weight, whereas if it's already against the bulkhead the force is reduced.
Again, I may be wrong (although the report quoted tells me I'm not totally wrong) but it just feels inherently safer to have the tank strapped to the bulkhead than in a cage. It actually isn't the cheapest option as a bulkhead costs more than an aftermarket cage.
The system I have has been tested. No "feelings" involved. Just an experiment where someone drove a van with a tank full of water into a concrete block at 30mph. The tank didn't go flying. Forgive me if this next phrase is patronising but that experiment is rather more scientific than a "feeling" about a bulkhead.
I've argued this till I'm blue in the face and I normally leave repetitive threads well alone. However on this subject I generally put my neb in because there's just a chance that someone might do something that could save their life one day.
Buy a crash tested system for a couple of thousand quid, keep it for ten years and it'll have cost you about 80p a working day.
Vin
The thread is about cages vs ratchet straps though. Note the title.
-
No need to be patronising, but in any case it says in the "absence" of lashing systems. In my opinion (and it is no more scientific than yours) a few bolts through a cage and through the floor of a van with a 800 litre tank are unlikely to restrain it in a head on crash. If it breaks through those bolts it's going to hit that bulkhead at 10x its own weight, whereas if it's already against the bulkhead the force is reduced.
Again, I may be wrong (although the report quoted tells me I'm not totally wrong) but it just feels inherently safer to have the tank strapped to the bulkhead than in a cage. It actually isn't the cheapest option as a bulkhead costs more than an aftermarket cage.
The system I have has been tested. No "feelings" involved. Just an experiment where someone drove a van with a tank full of water into a concrete block at 30mph. The tank didn't go flying. Forgive me if this next phrase is patronising but that experiment is rather more scientific than a "feeling" about a bulkhead.
I've argued this till I'm blue in the face and I normally leave repetitive threads well alone. However on this subject I generally put my neb in because there's just a chance that someone might do something that could save their life one day.
Buy a crash tested system for a couple of thousand quid, keep it for ten years and it'll have cost you about 80p a working day.
Vin
The thread is about cages vs ratchet straps though. Note the title.
Its still relevant to the subject as he is asking which is safest .......i totally agree with Vin on this .
As part of my other job i have been to a car accident only this morning , head on collision and the guy in the back actually hit the front seat passenger after his seatbelt snapped! The guy was old and frail and probably weighed no more than 65-70kg......this just goes to show how much the forces are multiplied in an accident.
-
From that document (section 5.1.2):
"In the DfT Code of Practice (2002) it is recommended that cargo should be placed next to partitioning
systems. In the absence of not having any purpose designed restraint system to restrain the cargo (e.g.lashings, racking systems etc.) then placing cargo next to the partitioning system should still be considered a minimum Best Practice (Assuming the barrier is designed and engineered to accommodate the forces generated in an accident)."
So up against a bulkhead is regarded as a minimum and it assumes the bulkhead is designed for the purpose.
Ah well, it's your lives not mine.
Vin
Not sure what you are getting at here. The tanks in the crash test videos I've seen don't appear to be up against the bulkhead so this report seems to contradict your argument. Is your crash tested tank against the bulkhead?
Just a question, not trying to hurt your feelings or nowt.
-
So is it good practice to overload the front axle then?
-
I can't believe how all the tight arse cleaners on here twist and turn the facts untill they are satisfied their homemade lash up is safe. There are tested systems out there I can see no reason not to use one to be honest. You know they work you've got the evidence. I'm sure the broom handle I've got between the door pillars will work and I've saved two grand!
-
Aww, you've hurt my feelings now. :'(
Really though, I agree with you and the other posters who say to go with a engineer designed system. Ours are designed by an engineer, it's just that he puts them flat, and against the bulkhead, which he says is safer.
-
Aww, you've hurt my feelings now. :'(
Really though, I agree with you and the other posters who say to go with a engineer designed system. Ours are designed by an engineer, it's just that he puts them flat, and against the bulkhead, which he says is safer.
No, they're saying crash tested not engineered. So I'm guessing there's only two - Grippa & Ionics? I think. Wasn't there some issue with Pure Freedom's crash test? Dunno.
-
I'm an engineer ( well ex-engineer ) and I can tell you some so called engineered designs are not worth a w@@k.
Before we all get on our high horses and throw handbags at each other, has anyone been involved in an accident with either DIY or PRO setups and what was the result, secondly can anyone find a report of a window cleaner being crushed/drowned by his DIY system.... Not attempting to dismiss the serious consequences of our tank systems, but as I understand it, DIY systems get insured and there is no legal requirement for crash tested systems - so it would appear in this H&S mad world DIY systems would be outlawed and certainly you could not get insured
Darran
-
Ours have been crashed at 50 mph (mk1) into a ditch and rolled at 60 (mk3).
No fatalities or serious injuries. No injuries whatsoever in fact. The tank stayed exactly where it was even with the landy lying upside down in the road.
-
Ours have been crashed at 50 mph (mk1) into a ditch and rolled at 60 (mk3).
No fatalities or serious injuries. No injuries whatsoever in fact. The tank stayed exactly where it was even with the landy lying upside down in the road.
It's more than a bulkhead though isn't it between the tank and the cab in a Defender? By that I mean it's more than just bolts holding it together.
It seems a nonsense to me to have that weight anywhere other than tight against the bulkhead. It would be interesting to see how such a system would perform in a crash test.
-
I'm an engineer ( well ex-engineer ) and I can tell you some so called engineered designs are not worth a w@@k.
Before we all get on our high horses and throw handbags at each other, has anyone been involved in an accident with either DIY or PRO setups and what was the result, secondly can anyone find a report of a window cleaner being crushed/drowned by his DIY system.... Not attempting to dismiss the serious consequences of our tank systems, but as I understand it, DIY systems get insured and there is no legal requirement for crash tested systems - so it would appear in this H&S mad world DIY systems would be outlawed and certainly you could not get insured
Darran
That's always something I say to be honest.
safety has to be of everyone's concern, but I'm yet to hear of a tank causing serious injury?
Obviously that isn't to say stick your tank on the rear axle with blue tack, but any tests that are done always seem heavily "weighted" (pardon the pun) towards manufactures selling there systems.
It would be really interesting to see a crash test of a tank against a steel (purpose built) bulkhead.
I've known a few incidents of window cleaners crashing, and only once have I heard of the tank moving at all, and then was only slight.
No matter what vehicle your in, or what you carry in the back.... If you have a head on crash at 50mph your going to be in big trouble.
I've seen some tanks bolted through the floor about 3 feet from the bulkhead, and it really makes me wonder if that is better than strapped in tight to the bulkhead?
Having said that..... My next tank will be a flat tank that fits the profile of the van. Should only be about 15 inches high, this is probably the safest way to carry a water tank. It is too long to flip up and come through the bulk head, And if it all went Pete tong at worst it would smash through the bulkhead underneath your feet.
Who knows though. Threads like these are a bit of a can of worms. We all have our opinions, and even the opinions of the companies who have carried out these crash tests aren't really fair. (in my opinion.)
-
Not sure what you are getting at here. The tanks in the crash test videos I've seen don't appear to be up against the bulkhead so this report seems to contradict your argument. Is your crash tested tank against the bulkhead?
Just a question, not trying to hurt your feelings or nowt.
Not sure it contradicts, as I read it as saying that, if you don't have purpose built racking (for which I read " purpose built whatever", in our case cage) then it should be against a bulkhead. If you do have a tank in a proper rack, I reckon it should be safer with space for the cage to deform in an accident - the deformation uses up energy, a good thing in a crash.
Vin
-
Having said that..... My next tank will be a flat tank that fits the profile of the van. Should only be about 15 inches high, this is probably the safest way to carry a water tank. It is too long to flip up and come through the bulk head, And if it all went Pete tong at worst it would smash through the bulkhead underneath your feet.
I've always liked that idea. The problem is getting it to work properly as a tank; park on a slope when it's 10% full and you'll be stuffed.
Vin
-
Having said that..... My next tank will be a flat tank that fits the profile of the van. Should only be about 15 inches high, this is probably the safest way to carry a water tank. It is too long to flip up and come through the bulk head, And if it all went Pete tong at worst it would smash through the bulkhead underneath your feet.
I've always liked that idea. The problem is getting it to work properly as a tank; park on a slope when it's 10% full and you'll be stuffed.
Vin
Yeah that was my worry too.
My current tank is from Stephen Scargill and he has recently made a 500 litre flat tank which is just like this. Sits on the floor of the van about 12 inches high. He builds in a false sloped floor at the bottom of the tank so the water is slopes to the outlet.
Then with a non return valve fitted on the outlet it gives the owner no problems apparently. Might be the way forward.
-
Having said that..... My next tank will be a flat tank that fits the profile of the van. Should only be about 15 inches high, this is probably the safest way to carry a water tank. It is too long to flip up and come through the bulk head, And if it all went Pete tong at worst it would smash through the bulkhead underneath your feet.
I've always liked that idea. The problem is getting it to work properly as a tank; park on a slope when it's 10% full and you'll be stuffed.
Vin
Luckily vans have wheels on and can be pointed downhill as well as up.
-
Ours have been crashed at 50 mph (mk1) into a ditch and rolled at 60 (mk3).
No fatalities or serious injuries. No injuries whatsoever in fact. The tank stayed exactly where it was even with the landy lying upside down in the road.
It's more than a bulkhead though isn't it between the tank and the cab in a Defender? By that I mean it's more than just bolts holding it together.
It seems a nonsense to me to have that weight anywhere other than tight against the bulkhead. It would be interesting to see how such a system would perform in a crash test.
No, it's a bulkhead, same as you get in a van.
-
I remember!!
So, how was the tank secured and did it move ? If I remember you fit them upto the bulkhead so no forward movement but what about when it was upside down
Darran
-
It's in a frame bottled to the chassis. It never moved. In fact we got the written off landy back and removed and reused the tank. Not the frame obviously.
-
Who made the frame ??
Darran
-
ALWAYS said a flat tank to the shape of the van floor made from plastic and baffled would be safest bet.
Thats exactly what i was gonna do 2 years ago, but my van blew up and needed a working van and system quick. Grippa is local so went to them.
The frame work is MASSIVELY over engineered. It's unreal. But i feel safer. Doesn't mean i drive like a mong.
-
No need to be patronising, but in any case it says in the "absence" of lashing systems. In my opinion (and it is no more scientific than yours) a few bolts through a cage and through the floor of a van with a 800 litre tank are unlikely to restrain it in a head on crash. If it breaks through those bolts it's going to hit that bulkhead at 10x its own weight, whereas if it's already against the bulkhead the force is reduced.
Again, I may be wrong (although the report quoted tells me I'm not totally wrong) but it just feels inherently safer to have the tank strapped to the bulkhead than in a cage. It actually isn't the cheapest option as a bulkhead costs more than an aftermarket cage.
The system I have has been tested. No "feelings" involved. Just an experiment where someone drove a van with a tank full of water into a concrete block at 30mph. The tank didn't go flying. Forgive me if this next phrase is patronising but that experiment is rather more scientific than a "feeling" about a bulkhead.
I've argued this till I'm blue in the face and I normally leave repetitive threads well alone. However on this subject I generally put my neb in because there's just a chance that someone might do something that could save their life one day.
Buy a crash tested system for a couple of thousand quid, keep it for ten years and it'll have cost you about 80p a working day.
Vin
Have you confirmed from the vehicle manufacturer if the floor strength through ribbing has been compromised with drilling and bolting through it ? Its all very well the frame manufacturers saying.."frame retains its integrity", what about the integrity of the van ?
-
Am I right in saying that drilling through and fitting a tank invalidates manufacturer warranty of a new vehicle?
I was told this recently.
Could just be the manufacturers wanting a get out clause mind you.
-
i had a 350L layflat tank in my last van(kangoo)and ratchet strapped it down tight using the vans eyelets.took me and my dad about half an hour.it felt very safe to me.then i took it out 4 years later when i sold the van and flogged it on gumtree. :)
this time round i got the local bodywork specialist mechanics to bolt a 500L tank frame through the van floor with 6 spreader plates(they had to take the fuel tank off and exhaust system to fit it).they fitted it longways so no axles are overloaded so it sits just behind the bulkhead with room down the sides for other gear.its perfect for me as i keep my trad gear near the side door so its easy to grab a clean cloth or change a brush.
the frame and tank i bought from the cleaning warehouse(£400)and £100 fitting.job done.ive had it 2 years now and hope to get another 3 years out of the van before buying a another one.
-
Who made the frame ??
Darran
My Dad designs and builds the systems.
-
No need to be patronising, but in any case it says in the "absence" of lashing systems. In my opinion (and it is no more scientific than yours) a few bolts through a cage and through the floor of a van with a 800 litre tank are unlikely to restrain it in a head on crash. If it breaks through those bolts it's going to hit that bulkhead at 10x its own weight, whereas if it's already against the bulkhead the force is reduced.
Again, I may be wrong (although the report quoted tells me I'm not totally wrong) but it just feels inherently safer to have the tank strapped to the bulkhead than in a cage. It actually isn't the cheapest option as a bulkhead costs more than an aftermarket cage.
The system I have has been tested. No "feelings" involved. Just an experiment where someone drove a van with a tank full of water into a concrete block at 30mph. The tank didn't go flying. Forgive me if this next phrase is patronising but that experiment is rather more scientific than a "feeling" about a bulkhead.
I've argued this till I'm blue in the face and I normally leave repetitive threads well alone. However on this subject I generally put my neb in because there's just a chance that someone might do something that could save their life one day.
Buy a crash tested system for a couple of thousand quid, keep it for ten years and it'll have cost you about 80p a working day.
Vin
Have you confirmed from the vehicle manufacturer if the floor strength through ribbing has been compromised with drilling and bolting through it ? Its all very well the frame manufacturers saying.."frame retains its integrity", what about the integrity of the van ?
If you look at the grippatank crash test video you can see how the van chassis reacts in an accident , takes it pretty well but obviously you want it to deform some as it takes away some of the crash energy .
4 20-25 mm holes are not going to weaken the floor of a vehicle .
-
Pretty sure Grippa dont go through the chassis.
-
Pretty sure Grippa dont go through the chassis.
Correct , they don't, the four holes are drilled through the floor and a large plate is bonded and bolted underneath the floor with the t lock on the inside .......so its not going to affect the strength of the van floor/chassis .
-
Who made the frame ??
Darran
My Dad designs and builds the systems.
Fab!
They look the bees knees
Darran
-
Pretty sure Grippa dont go through the chassis.
Correct , they don't, the four holes are drilled through the floor and a large plate is bonded and bolted underneath the floor with the t lock on the inside .......so its not going to affect the strength of the van floor/chassis .
Very few if any modern panel vans actually have a "chassis", they are a monocoque construction. Drilling though, on or near a ribbed floor does affect its strength, wether anyone likes it or not. They don't rib them for fun.
-
Cleanclear, ref your sarcastic snipe in http://www.cleanitup.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=202302.msg1779322#msg1779322
Yeah, start a poll....and ask, is a window cleaner qualified to state straps need to hold two buses up before your system is considered safe.
Come on then, Cleanclear, tell us all why 600 Kg of water decelerating at 30g won't exert the same force on your bulkhead as the weight of two double decker buses (which I take to be about 18,000kg above). Show us all where the physics doesn't result in that conclusion. Doesn't matter if I'm the most stupid person on the planet: if the physics stands up it stands up regardless of my competence or otherwise. Please show your workings.
Vin
PS. The reason to take this subject seriously is that bad advice from people who really don't know what they are talking about can kill people.
-
Cleanclear, ref your sarcastic snipe in http://www.cleanitup.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=202302.msg1779322#msg1779322
Yeah, start a poll....and ask, is a window cleaner qualified to state straps need to hold two buses up before your system is considered safe.
Come on then, Cleanclear, tell us all why 600 Kg of water decelerating at 30g won't exert the same force on your bulkhead as the weight of two double decker buses (which I take to be about 18,000kg above). Show us all where the physics doesn't result in that conclusion. Doesn't matter if I'm the most stupid person on the planet: if the physics stands up it stands up regardless of my competence or otherwise. Please show your workings.
Vin
PS. The reason to take this subject seriously is that bad advice from people who really don't know what they are talking about can kill people.
Ok, Ok, you're rushing me so this is off the cuff............... Your figures don't stack up. Neither does your metholgy. If we take the roof off your van and attach a ratchet strap around two buses and then onto your tank mounts, and lift your van in the air to lift the buses up the the bolts will rip out the van floor. Don't argue Physics with me either as most vans are good for a 6, 800, 100 kilo payload or what ever and NOT 18,000 KG.
You make no distinction in your assesment of how things will pan out in as much as, if 600KG is affixed firmly to a bulkead and a sudden stop occurs what its impact will be Vs 600KG in the middle of the load bed coming unsecured and flying through a bulkhead ? As i mentioned earlier in this thread, the fact alone of loading against a bulkhead, to stop any forward momentum, as opposed to loading away from a bulkhead where a load or fixture can gather momentum will lead to very differnent forces. You based your bus assumption on which one ?
And while i've got ya, if we lift buses up with your van system do we go steady, or snatch 'em up real quick ?
-
Or another way to explain it...................
i ask you to give me a crack in the kipper, and you do. It'll hurt me, and may be, probably will knock me over.
Try do the same thing with your fist resting firmly on my cheek from the start.................
I'm sure your first crack will have a G force of whatever newtons law tells you, see if you can replicate it in the second scenario............
-
And in your own time Vin, could you please explain to the group "inertia", and its effects and how to delay those effects. As you say, its a life and death matter and its important we know more and are informed. Back to the Puma/Adidas question, i'd say.............Brand is not important. Just get something with spikes on, you need to get a grip !! ;D
You're only a window cleaner though and wether you'll heed my advice is anyones guess .
-
Or another way to explain it...................
i ask you to give me a crack in the kipper, and you do. It'll hurt me, and may be, probably will knock me over.
Try do the same thing with your fist resting firmly on my cheek from the start.................
I'm sure your first crack will have a G force of whatever newtons law tells you, see if you can replicate it in the second scenario............
That's a good point actually......
-
I think the moving water helps provide the inertia? Shoving everything up against the bulkhead might help but your weight distribution won't be within the vehicles parameters with a large tank. The rear axle will have next to nothing on it, the front will be overloaded.
-
Ok, Ok, you're rushing me so this is off the cuff............... Your figures don't stack up. Neither does your metholgy. If we take the roof off your van and attach a ratchet strap around two buses and then onto your tank mounts, and lift your van in the air to lift the buses up the the bolts will rip out the van floor. Don't argue Physics with me either as most vans are good for a 6, 800, 100 kilo payload or what ever and NOT 18,000 KG.
I see where your misunderstanding comes from; you've missed an important point. As I said in my explanation earlier in the thread, the situation in an accident is the same as if you turn the van on its nose and rest the 18,000 kg against the bulkhead (or tank, or whatever's holding the water back). You'll note that all the forces on the tank mounts are shear forces (at right angles to the bolts). You're not trying to rip the bolts out of the floor vertically as in your example. To see the difference, stick a normal pin in a bit of cardboard. Pull it all the way through and it's pretty easy. Try to rip it sideways through the cardboard. Difficult to the point of impossibility.
You make no distinction in your assesment of how things will pan out in as much as, if 600KG is affixed firmly to a bulkead and a sudden stop occurs what its impact will be Vs 600KG in the middle of the load bed coming unsecured and flying through a bulkhead ? As i mentioned earlier in this thread, the fact alone of loading against a bulkhead, to stop any forward momentum, as opposed to loading away from a bulkhead where a load or fixture can gather momentum will lead to very differnent forces. You based your bus assumption on which one ?
There is a distinction but it's irrelevant. If the van is decelerating at 30g then the force acting on whatever's holding the load back has to be thirty times its weight. I'm happy to work it all out in Newtons but all of the units cancel out so you may as well take the short cut and say deceleration in g multiplied by mass. Saves a great deal of maths.
The bus assumption is based on both scenarios. If the van is decelerating at 30g then the force acting on whatever is holding the 600kg load back will be 18,000kg. It doesn't matter if the tank's held with straps, blu-tack or whatever, the forces will be the same. Then, in your scenario, the tank starts moving and hits the bulkhead and yes, you're right, it probably passes through the bulkhead because the impulse (force over time of action) is huge as it hits the bulkhead. That would be relevant if at any point I'd been arguing that unrestrained (or insufficiently restrained) away from the bulkhead is as good as up against the bulkhead. Sadly, I've not been saying that, you're the one fixated with that comparison.
And while i've got ya, if we lift buses up with your van system do we go steady, or snatch 'em up real quick ?
I'm not lifting buses.
Anyway, you're not interested in anything factual as you've decided, with no basis apart from your opinion, that up against a bulkhead is safe. The physics says that if the bulkhead can withstand an 18,000kg weight acting along the axis of the van then you're right. Note (and I know you haven't) that at no point have I said that a bulkhead can't withstand 18,000 kg. I've taken a look at a couple of bulkheads since this thread started and while I suspect mine wouldn't (Hiace), a Vivaro's might, much more substantial. But the problem is that's guesswork.
But my job here isn't to convince you. You're unconvincable (I'm already awaiting yours and your cronies' posts telling me how sad I am and how tragic that I actually understand physics).
No, my aim is to convince anyone reading this with an open mind that a crash-tested system is the way to go rather than believing the word of a bloke on the internet who tells them that up against a bulkhead is safe. For the sake of a couple of thousand quid over ten years (£4 a week) you might just save your life.
Vin
PS. If this post is too long for your attention span (boy, can I see those posts coming), apologies. Sometimes difficult matters take a bit of space to explain.
PPS. Ref the upcoming torrent of abuse about how tragic I am, how little I really know, how odd that I can be a window cleaner and understand physics at the same time, remember the final paragraph. This is potentially life and death and £4 a week might save your life.
-
Or another way to explain it...................
i ask you to give me a crack in the kipper, and you do. It'll hurt me, and may be, probably will knock me over.
Try do the same thing with your fist resting firmly on my cheek from the start.................
I'm sure your first crack will have a G force of whatever newtons law tells you, see if you can replicate it in the second scenario............
You choose not to understand. I don't care about a comparison of a load flying into a bulkhead versus strapped against the bulkhead. I care about the comparison between a load strapped to the bulkhead, which in your opinion is safe, and a system that has been shown to be safe by testing and that won't allow the load to go anywhere near the bulkhead.
Vin
-
And in your own time Vin, could you please explain to the group "inertia", and its effects and how to delay those effects. As you say, its a life and death matter and its important we know more and are informed. Back to the Puma/Adidas question, i'd say.............Brand is not important. Just get something with spikes on, you need to get a grip !! ;D
You're only a window cleaner though and wether you'll heed my advice is anyones guess .
You do realise you've just ruined his wife's weekend, that's Saturday Morning gone already!! ;D
-
Blind Pierre (Or Chumbucket, the last name he dropped) is on my ignore list but I bet £10 to go to Age UK if I'm wrong that his last post was just an attack on me rather than a comment about the subject in question. Do let me know.
My very own personal stalker never lets me down.
Vin
-
Blind Pierre (Or Chumbucket, the last name he dropped) is on my ignore list but I bet £10 to go to Age UK if I'm wrong that his last post was just an attack on me rather than a comment about the subject in question. Do let me know.
My very own personal stalker never lets me down.
Vin
I thought he was on your Ignore list? Even so, you still have the option to ignore anyway...... you just can't resist, your will lets you down! ;)
Your poor, poor wife!! ;D
-
Or another way to explain it...................
i ask you to give me a crack in the kipper, and you do. It'll hurt me, and may be, probably will knock me over.
Try do the same thing with your fist resting firmly on my cheek from the start.................
I'm sure your first crack will have a G force of whatever newtons law tells you, see if you can replicate it in the second scenario............
You choose not to understand. I don't care about a comparison of a load flying into a bulkhead versus strapped against the bulkhead. I care about the comparison between a load strapped to the bulkhead, which in your opinion is safe, and a system that has been shown to be safe by testing and that won't allow the load to go anywhere near the bulkhead.
Vin
Morning Vin ;D , i'm not boldly stating any tank just strapped to a bulkhead is safe. I'm saying in general, best practice is to secure to bulkhead for carrying loads. I'm also saying the current "best" fitted system idea is.......bolted through the floor, and its not really the best or safest way to secure a tank. They all follow each other and just do it, but its the best on offer out there at the moment. Actually, there is a guy , i've seen his site mentioned on here before, he makes bespoke fitted tanks that appear to be integrated into the van floor. Thats the best idea i've seen so far, but i don't think his are crash tested.
I'll ask again, has anyone contacted any van manufacturers to see if the floor strength has been compromised by this drilling, bolting and fitting ?
-
Or another way to explain it...................
i ask you to give me a crack in the kipper, and you do. It'll hurt me, and may be, probably will knock me over.
Try do the same thing with your fist resting firmly on my cheek from the start.................
I'm sure your first crack will have a G force of whatever newtons law tells you, see if you can replicate it in the second scenario............
You choose not to understand. I don't care about a comparison of a load flying into a bulkhead versus strapped against the bulkhead. I care about the comparison between a load strapped to the bulkhead, which in your opinion is safe, and a system that has been shown to be safe by testing and that won't allow the load to go anywhere near the bulkhead.
Vin
Morning Vin ;D , i'm not boldly stating any tank just strapped to a bulkhead is safe. I'm saying in general, best practice is to secure to bulkhead for carrying loads. I'm also saying the current "best" fitted system idea is.......bolted through the floor, and its not really the best or safest way to secure a tank. They all follow each other and just do it, but its the best on offer out there at the moment. Actually, there is a guy , i've seen his site mentioned on here before, he makes bespoke fitted tanks that appear to be integrated into the van floor. Thats the best idea i've seen so far, but i don't think his are crash tested.
I'll ask again, has anyone contacted any van manufacturers to see if the floor strength has been compromised by this drilling, bolting and fitting ?
They are not crash tested but he worked for a company who did crash testing on their tanks. Obviously he hasn't copied their designs inside. But the baffling is clever ;)