Clean It Up
UK Window Cleaning Forum => Window Cleaning Forum => Topic started by: jeff1 on April 23, 2008, 04:14:02 pm
-
Well here I am again, this time putting my twopence worth in regarding the Ionics system, advertised in the Window Cleaners Magazine that dropped onto my Mat today.
On another Post, there is a section regarding this mag as being bias, OK so it is, but who pays for it?? I don't know?
I'm not a Ionics user and my honest and only reason for this is COST and I don't mind admitting it, I would love one.
There very expensive and I could never see how they could Justify the cost? but read on.
That's not the reason I wrote this today, I read their article on crash testing that cost Ionic well over £100,000, the first thing that caught my eye on the back page was the tank frame holding bracket made from cast, when I first seen it, my thoughts were, that will never hold in a head on impact? How wrong I was.
Thatcham Testing center who carry out crash testing was the place all the tests were carried out, so it wasn't an ionics employee who drove the van at a wall at 30mph and jumped out just before impact, this is an official recognised body.
Test 1,2,3 and 4 were the Hyper-G-sled tests, this enabled ionics to test and fine-tune there installed systems.
Test1 impacted at only 12.4mph although a Pass result, it showed ionics that improvements could be made, 2 of the 8 holding brackets failed so ionics improved the holding brackets.
Test 2 was conducted at 18.6mph and Failed, this test highlighted that a system fitted to the thin floor and not the chassis,..at impact the system hinged forward ripping the brackets and steel under plates right through the floor, again 2 brackets failed.
Test 3 Again conducted at 18.6mph but this time the improvements to the clamps and steel chassis resulted in a Pass, no failed clamps in this test and the system stayed were it was fitted, ionics felt that further improvements to the clamps were needed as they showed signs of imminent failure.
Test 4 was conducted at 31.1mph With the redesign of the clamps and the tank frame the test was a Pass, none of the anchor points or clamps failed, ionics were now ready for there 100% barrier crash test.
This test had to be near as possible to a real head on crash, the van was accelerated to 30mph and driven into a 100 tonne concrete barrier, a complete success, the tank frame absorbing a good amount of the impact energy and all the clamps held securely.
All this testing has resulted in ionics gaining the FMVSS-208 safety standard certification for the fitted systems.
Now if its true what ionics say (and I can't see why its not) that insurance companies will soon refuse insurance to van mounted systems, if they are not fitted to the FMVSS standard, this will have a huge impact on van mount system installers who don't hold this certificate. Nice business move Craig, not was it only a good business move, it was an excellent safety move.
I've seen many 1000ltr tanks held in by ratchet straps, that's fine if there the right breaking strain, have a look at ionics test results and see the tonnage forces placed upon the fixings during a crash, I've also seen 1000ltr tanks fitted with ratchet straps that are attached to eye bolts, bolted to the thin metal floor, No good guy's, get the bolts fitted to the chassis, and check the breaking strain? of straps and bolts and only ever use high tensile steel nuts and bolts.
I seen last week a 1000ltr system fitted with timber blocks to stop the tank moving around the van, When I said to the guy about it, his attitude was ''It'll be alright its not going any where??? Crazy or what.
If ionics tests saves just one life? then well done to them in my mind.
Insurance companies may now be looking for approved installed systems before they will insure you.
These tests may have a devastating future impact on window cleaners with van mounts, what if you can't afford a pro fitted system? are you going to drive around with no insurance? are you going to return to ladders? Who knows what the future holds.
I for one, have a trailer system and these tests won't affect me, but I do feel for the van mounted Guy's who may not be able to obtain insurance for the van system in the future.
-
all the other companies involved in fitting tanks into vans would also need to obtain the fmvss 08 certificate as I,m sure they wouldn,t want to lose the business ...secondly all well and done the ionics van hitting a 100 ton barrier at 18 mph,21mph etc...were in the real world what would happen if the vechile hit a wall at 75mph?
-
We have vans fitted out by Sortimo which PWC kindly highlighted are crash tested!!
-
all the other companies involved in fitting tanks into vans would also need to obtain the fmvss 08 certificate as I,m sure they wouldn,t want to lose the business ...secondly all well and done the ionics van hitting a 100 ton barrier at 18 mph,21mph etc...were in the real world what would happen if the vechile hit a wall at 75mph?
Read the mag? one company whos system was put through secret tests without them knowing has already given up installing them and now only builds trailer systems.
The cost of obtaining these certificated I would imagine is huge.
Standard barrier crash tests are carried out at 30mph even for all the cars we drive today, there not tested at 75mph which is Illegal by the way, even if you had a head on crash at 70mph your chances of survival are reduced even in a car, I don't think anyone would survive this sort of crash with a 1 Ton tank behind them no matter how its fitted.
-
Interesting as what constitutes a van being modified? an installed system probably is a modification but a tank strapped down any old way may be classed as cargo?
-
What has your experience been like with there service
As the Lad that covers Berkshire is a one before B-Hole.
He Just about returned my call from his car and then did not bother to ring again when he said he would ring back
The service is a shambles as he was probbably not impressed as I was only looking at entry level for van.
But I really do love there kit as it is spot on but I will buy from another rep oneday
-
so i assume the same should go for lorries carrying IBC containers which are basically only packed into the trailer and sometimes straps through over them ?
sounds like scaremainering
"Now if its true what ionics say (and I can't see why its not) that insurance companies will soon refuse insurance to van mounted systems, if they are not fitted to the FMVSS standard"
where do Ionics say the above and which insurance companies name has been put to this ?
-
Exactly what I was saying the other night.
Is saving a few quid worth risking your life?
One day it will happen and someone will die the most horrible bone crushing death which could have been totally avoided. And unfortunately with wfp now becoming more and more popular it could eventually be more dangerous than ladders, imagine that.
Or imagine an employee was in a serious accident? Your insurance would be void and without doubt you would probably face criminal charges for negligence and of course Bankruptcy.
Wfp systems fitted by Mickey Mouse and gang are nothing short of a death wish! Even with a box frame steel cage I wouldn't like to try my luck especialy after seeing those bolts in sled-test 2 rip through the floor at 18.6mph I would hate to think what would happen without floor strengthening.
It seems I may have initially been slightly wrong when I said my tank would hold under 640tonnes. It turns out from what I read today it will take 540, but hey, give or take 100tonnes I'm not fussed especially when considering the 30mph 1000l tank would only create 52tonnes of kinetic energy. However make no mistake about it 52ton is 52ton and an enormous force, mere straps or whatever diy means of securing a tank would stand absolutely no chance.
Go to the Ionic Systems website and see the shocking crash test footage for yourself!
Although I have nothing against diy if done properly I can’t stand all this "my clobbered together system is better than yours" and recomending dangerous and life threatning practices. One member here even once told us all "its fine to seatbelt a tank in the back of an estate car"
‘Investment always pays’ in some cases, it does. It can pay for piece of mind and to someone with sense that alone is worth every penny.
ProPole
-
I would have to agree that is why I was looking at the system but as yet can not afford it so catch 22 really
Want it as safety or I would not have gone WFP then risking things with 10 25 liter cans in motor
doh
-
I would have thought that there would be a minimum load rating whereby this couldnt come into force unless you exceeded that load, otherwise we'd all be uninsured for having a flask of coffee in the van.
Perhaps anything above 300 litres.
-
I see their certificate was awarded in February 2003 ??? ??? So if thats the case why havent insurance companies refused insurance since then ?? that is 5 years ago;...... and theyre only bringing it to light now??
??? ???
-
its all twaddle, I have had a look at Ionics systems, and to be honest, I don't think much of them - poor quality fittings, the frames are ok I suppose but the real issue here is how they are fitted.
The FMVS test only applies to the exact same system, so if it was tested with a 300ltr tank, then the 600 and 1000ltr systems are not covered by the certificate. Add to this the fact they tested in a transit I think, it does not apply to a different van. The systems are generic and as such cannot be covered by a single test certificate. much more important is the PSV certificate on a van, the inspector is resposible for ensuring any fitted machinery, tank or cylinder is fitted in such a way that it does not create a danger to the driver or passenger/s.
The humble opinion of Alan
-
Go to the Ionic Systems website and see the shocking crash test footage for yourself!
ProPole
IN that video i was watching the ionics system didn't move an inch, but the other one killed the dummy, did it have any straps what so ever, it just looked like a solid piece of metal flying through the air.
is the 540 kinetic tons the same as 540 real tons though, because i think there is a difference in energy and actual force, i cant be sure
-
I think we should conduct a test ourselves,
if everyone one on this forum put in £10 we could buy a ex bt transit mk5 for £500 and get a 500l tank and strap it down,
get a few high speed camera at 2 angles and 2 normal speed cameras. and then all we need is a big block of concrete,
i think it would be good to crash it at 40mph a more realistic speed to have a head on, i dont know about you but you have to be a fool to have a head on at 30mph, if you hit another car its 15mph each,
its more likely to be 60mph in a built up area where bother vehicles are traveling at 30mph.
so to conclude lets get a van and test it ourselves to see what really happens
who is with me, i will donate the first tenner!
-
who is with me, i will donate the first tenner!
;D ;D
Im up for that, perhaps Jeremy Clarkson would be interested, get the Hamster to drive the truck ;D
heres my tenner
(http://www.dojoo.notlong.com/)
-
there is a difference.
540 tons resting at rest exerts 540tons of force on the ground, it exerts force in a downwards motion.
540 kinetic tons is a vague description of the force exerted by a tank moving in a predominantly horizontal motion.
It does not take into account force/area = pressure.
A pencil travelling fast enough could exert 540 kinetic tons of force (kinetic simply means moving)
and yes I would love to do some testing, we used to do a lot of stress testing when I worked in aerospace but it was boring. Lets crash the vans at 90mph, make it corkscrew through the air and blow up wayhay fun!
-
no im being serious not advanced stat taking test, just one so we can see what really happens to a tank of water secured by ratchet straps,
it will cost £1000 it total, just need the concrete block
-
who is with me, i will donate the first tenner!
;D ;D
Im up for that, perhaps Jeremy Clarkson would be interested, get the Hamster to drive the truck ;D
heres my tenner
www.dojoo.notlong.com
lol
-
Can I drive it ?
-
Can I drive it ?
well there is the danger you could die... but all things considered i dont see why not
i would prefer alexis the ctd, but
who would be up for donating £10 and seeing what can be done?
-
so i assume the same should go for lorries carrying IBC containers which are basically only packed into the trailer and sometimes straps through over them ?
sounds like scaremainering
"Now if its true what ionics say (and I can't see why its not) that insurance companies will soon refuse insurance to van mounted systems, if they are not fitted to the FMVSS standard"
where do Ionics say the above and which insurance companies name has been put to this
Its on page 19 under the heading Crash testing and the future.
for those that don't have the mag I will give a brief out-line.
Quote
Insurers too are now becoming very sensitive to this issue.
Obtaining motor insurance that have non compliant systems installed is becoming more difficult.
Several insurers now ask to see the certificate of compliance with FMVSS-208 before they agree to insure a vehicle.
un-quote
That was an extract from the mag.
-
I live right next to the TRL and they have all the road testing crash mad things and pullies I recon they would be up for the test and I will have a chat with my mates one has got to have an in somewhere
If not we are all taking £10 down to St Ives lol
This is a you tube opportunity and it could save the rest of us
But I will try and find out about the Road Traffic Lab to see if they will test it and what we would need
on the down side If you do you know that they could bring out laws and therefore screw us
big companies regards life as money paid out in accidents and weigh it up to the % of it actually happening by how much to develope.
Watch Fight club the bit about insurance it is all true I have seen it happen twice at a big UK plane company that flies the flag
-
Can I drive it ?
well there is the danger you could die... but all things considered i dont see why not
i would prefer alexis the ctd, but
who would be up for donating £10 and seeing what can be done?
You probably would want to have Dave sign something there you know, just in case his widow got one of those 'no win, no fee' bods onto you ;D
-
just renewed my van insurance on monday, as long as I'm not carrying explosives, something or other or acid powder they didnt have a problem. Now the thing that bugs me about all this is that most of us fit tanks in with straps. Now ny vans hane 400 litre tank fitted (2/3 of the carrying capacity of the van) and with the flat tank fitted tight to the bulkhead they are then strapped in using 5 tonne ratchet straps. These are the maximum cloth type straps on the market- the type I used to strap pallets onto 40 foot trailers, and yes I used to carry IBC tanks, 26 at a time. These straps are fitted to the anchor points on the van floor that are put there by the manufacturer. So here's my point/question- if the straps fail and the achor points fail, how come the straps have a kite mark on, and if the van fails how can it be sold for carrying freight in the first place.
Personally I believe its a little bit of scaremainering to get the newbies to part with their hard earned
-
whats the chances of smashig into a concrete wall ::)
-
I think we should conduct a test ourselves,
if everyone one on this forum put in £10 we could buy a ex bt transit mk5 for £500 and get a 500l tank and strap it down,
get a few high speed camera at 2 angles and 2 normal speed cameras. and then all we need is a big block of concrete,
i think it would be good to crash it at 40mph a more realistic speed to have a head on, i dont know about you but you have to be a fool to have a head on at 30mph, if you hit another car its 15mph each,
its more likely to be 60mph in a built up area where bother vehicles are traveling at 30mph.
so to conclude lets get a van and test it ourselves to see what really happens
who is with me, i will donate the first tenner!
Listen Guy's I don't fancy some window cleaner being scaped of the windsceen or the concrete wall, so here is what I have done for you and you can all help me out here.
I have just contacted Top Gear via there web and asked for the Hampster to conduct these test for us, (I am so a dead man my Boss just said she loves this little hampster), So I made sure I asked for him to conduct the tests Lol
Here is the link, www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/contact_us_thanks.shtml
just back me up and ask them to conduct the tank test useing 1000ltrs of water using a tank of course or knowing them lot they will try it without the tank Lol, I have asked for the test to be done at a speed of 45/50mph useing ratchets as tie downs.
If we bombard them with requests I think they may just do it, if anything just to give us w/c a load of stick.
-
jeff can you not lead the way and sit in the van for us, just to prove it works ;D
-
thing is if they do do it
1/ they will probably use the rustiest ribby old van
2/ wont fasten them down properly
If the van isnt a total right-off they wouldnt bother. If nothing happens to the van and all that happes is that it ends up with a flat end its not exactly good tv, unless your a window cleaner
-
jeff can you not lead the way and sit in the van for us, ust to prove it works ;D
Sure I can Joe, but you have to stand against the concrete wall to cusion the blow for me. ;D ;D ;D
-
thats no prob with the weight am putting on lol, on a seriouse note, i thought all vans with water tanks had a secured barrier behind them, as well as the tank being secured to the floor, should the barrier if built correctly from strong material, not stop the tank landing on our heads,
-
I read the mag, and to be honest it is what I already knew but was putting to the back of my mind.
I knew it was an important thing, but i guess i have been just trying not to think about it.
It has made me want to speed up getting a new system, and i'm now even more sure of what I will get.
-
atricle worked then tennet!!
-
atricle worked then tennet!!
In highlighting a danger, yes.
-
atricle worked then tennet!!
In highlighting a danger, yes.
or selling another system ? ? ? ?
yes
-
whats the chances of smashig into a concrete wall ::)
This is a good point. If I have a head on there is a metre or two of crumple zone on each vehicle. (A bit of give, that you don't get with a concrete wall.)
To be representative of a "head-on" you need to crash into another vehicle.
-
so the question has to be asked, is it a safety feature or an advertisment?. How do they fix the tank to the chassis. do they weld brackets onto it or do they drill into it?- ie: weakening the structure. Now I dont for one minut doubt that its safe, the safety tests show that it is but no-one has ever done tests on the actual strapping points with straps. In one of their brochures it shows a sprinter being smashed into a wall/block and the chassis buckling, where is the last photo of that reel?, can we see the end result. Also that was a test at 30, in a head on crash both vehicles doing 30mph would have a terminal speed of 60mph- what would happen to the van and driver then
Surely if this has made you think why not double the gap between you and the car infront, and that number in that round road sign is a limit not a target
-
I recieved my copy first thing this morning, and it made it's usual journey from my letterbox to my bin!!! You wouldn't catch me reading that load of Ionics propaganda!!!!! >:( And to think that they actually used to try to make us pay for that load of rubbish!!
-
ok i dont think top gear will do it how we want it done, instead of 1000l which very few of us carry, 600l is a happy medium,
how about a pledge pay, where we all say yep i will put down ten pounds if and when you get it all together,
that way no one parts with any money until it is necessary, we could all chip in things we want to see, speed, straps anchor points etc etc etc
i think i could get hold of some high frame rate cameras too
-
Those videos are a load of crap.
There's no bulkhead, so if it's not secure of course it's going to hit the back of the driver. ???
Like to see my 300-odd litres jump 2 feet in the air and go through a steel bulkhead. ::)
-
Surely if this has made you think why not double the gap between you and the car infront, and that number in that round road sign is a limit not a target
Excellent advice Steve!! That is exactly how I drive, and is a far safer option than waisting 10k on a flashy system then charging around because you have been lulled into a false sense of security by a glossy advert that basically says 'you will be perfectly ok in a head on collision as long as you and the vehicle you collide with is only travelling at 15mph'!! ;D
-
so i take it squeaky and groundhog will be prepared to part with £10 if we can make it work?
-
Alex if you can organise it I would gladly part with a tenner!! ;)
-
Thing is with Ionics they have an exceptional marketing team and must spend thousands each year in trying to brainwash everybody. Somebody has to pay for that. Who is it? The end user of course. It is why they are so much more expensive, you are buying a concept.
One thing I have seen with my own eyes is the clamps that fix to the chasis are in fact galvanised. If you look at the pictures in the mag they show the progression of the clamps from their inception.I have a friend who welds and fabricates stainless steel and alloys, he says they are easy to make. Thjey are then made to look nice by being galvanised. It is not the system as such that has been given the approval but the clamps themselves, hence why the number is on that part. So whats my point.
Someone else I know (theres 2!!) had an ionics system in his van. He had to remove it from the van (2 many reasons to list) and low and behold they had to cut it out, why? because although the clamps are galvanised the bolts are not and they had rusted over 3 years so they weremore likely to snap and they certainly would not release.
Surely this cannot be good. We all know how aggressive pure water can be and these bolts showed that. Rusty metal is weak metal so I would think that could make it just as dangerous as say another system fitted in your van?
-
Good i will go about making plans
I think we need
an old van maybe a transit, £400
another car £50
pickup truck for taking away the old van and car £100
cameras, free if we can find some people to help,
location need some private land
tank £200
ratchet straps £70
eye bolts £10
anyone else go any ideas
-
anyone got any stats on how many window cleaners have been killed by being crushed by their tanks during road accident ::) ::)
-
Thing is with Ionics they have an exceptional marketing team and must spend thousands each year in trying to brainwash everybody. Somebody has to pay for that. Who is it? The end user of course. It is why they are so much more expensive, you are buying a concept.
One thing I have seen with my own eyes is the clamps that fix to the chasis are in fact galvanised. If you look at the pictures in the mag they show the progression of the clamps from their inception.I have a friend who welds and fabricates stainless steel and alloys, he says they are easy to make. Thjey are then made to look nice by being galvanised. It is not the system as such that has been given the approval but the clamps themselves, hence why the number is on that part. So whats my point.
Someone else I know (theres 2!!) had an ionics system in his van. He had to remove it from the van (2 many reasons to list) and low and behold they had to cut it out, why? because although the clamps are galvanised the bolts are not and they had rusted over 3 years so they weremore likely to snap and they certainly would not release.
Surely this cannot be good. We all know how aggressive pure water can be and these bolts showed that. Rusty metal is weak metal so I would think that could make it just as dangerous as say another system fitted in your van?
Rusty bolts (not galvanised) is the weakest link in the suppose to be safe tank fitting. I've welded all sorts to armoured tanks and I'd never use untreated bolts to secure something that important.
-
I think it said in the mag that no w/c had been killed as yet, but we all know the reality of this and its only time that will tell.
It doesnt matter how many tests are carried out, I think we should all take it very seriously that even a 25ltr container flying through your van and smashing into you and causing you some damage.
Some guy's are misled that thinking the bulkhead will stop a tank, take a look at the flimsy welds thats holding your bulkhead to your van and do you think it will stop your 300ltr tank in a crash at 40mph? Think again guy's.
The only thing I'm trying to get across, is get that tank held down properly and fasten it to the chassis useing high tensile steel nuts and bolts, I did a post some time back saying how to do it, I even said how to tighten the nuts and bolts correctly useing star washers.
Don't be that first casualty do it properly guy's.
-
Surely the test encompasses the clamp as a unit (inc bolt) when certifying it? But from this report it seems the Thatcham tested clamp has a shelflife before needing to be replaced. Three years is hardly a long time.
-
Yes It is an Ionics mag, but you cant deny it is an interesting and good article.
I think Ionics should be praised for taking the stance on crash testing.
I know money makes Craig and co tick, but I also know the last thing they want is for window cleaners to be killed by one of there systems.
The problem of carrying unsecured loads is not going to go away, as more and more people are turning towards wfp, It wont be long before we see a major crush injury or even death due to wfp.
Trevor Knight highlighted the problem to me, He told me to fill a 25 lt container and get someone to throw it to me and try catching it.
Try it then you will realise the true weight of water, Imagine that same 25 litres flying at you in the event of an accident, those of you who fill barrels will know what i am talking about.
-
Some guy's are misled that thinking the bulkhead will stop a tank, take a look at the flimsy welds thats holding your bulkhead to your van and do you think it will stop your 300ltr tank in a crash at 40mph? Think again guy's.
No it won't.
And I was going fast enough I'm 2ft above my flat tank anyway.
It may break away laterally, but strapped down it ain't going to jump 2ft in the air and still have enough forward motion to bust through a steel wall.
Don't be sucked in by advertising.
-
EXACTLY SQUEEKY, THATS ALL IT IS. Theres no doubting that its a quality system, we all know it is, but the average housewife wouldnt have a clue what she was looking at if it slapped her round her head. I know that they did a test on a newly fitted system, how will it fair after foar or five years of work and roadsalt.
At the end of the day if they've made us think about our safety and get a few people to re-fit their van and make them that little bit safer then we all ought to thank them for that at least
-
Some guy's are misled that thinking the bulkhead will stop a tank, take a look at the flimsy welds thats holding your bulkhead to your van and do you think it will stop your 300ltr tank in a crash at 40mph? Think again guy's.
No it won't.
And I was going fast enough I'm 2ft above my flat tank anyway.
It may break away laterally, but strapped down it ain't going to jump 2ft in the air and still have enough forward motion to bust through a steel wall.
Don't be sucked in by advertising.
I don't go by adverts squeeky, I don't get sucked in by salesmen, but I guess what ever is said you will never belive it, so you carry on and believe what you must and that you are safe.
Take a tip from Dave and just throw just a 25ltr container at it, then come back and tell me what damage it caused ::) then think of what 300ltrs will do.
All bulk heads are spot welded and are made of very thin sheet steel.
-
then look around for a good aftermarket one. From the floorup to two feet mine has two inch round tube seam welded to a two inch round frame all round and the mesh infill
-
I really don't see how a throwing around 25 L containers willy-nilly can prove anything............
Seriously, thousands of trades use vans every day, they are designed to carry certain weights (be it a palette of bricks, office equipment, etc) I don't think any of these trades are using the Ionics Thatcham tested bolts, do you? Just take an ice cream van for example, the weight of a fully loaded freezer must be at least a few hundred kilograms. How are they strapped down?
It really is just scaremainering, just like the ladder ban, to get you to buy their systems.
-
I really don't see how a throwing around 25 L containers willy-nilly can prove anything............
Seriously, thousands of trades use vans every day, they are designed to carry certain weights (be it a palette of bricks, office equipment, etc) I don't think any of these trades are using the Ionics Thatcham tested bolts, do you? Just take an ice cream van for example, the weight of a fully loaded freezer must be at least a few hundred kilograms. How are they strapped down?
It really is just scaremainering, just like the ladder ban, to get you to buy their systems.
Brilliant post. ;)
-
A Petrol Tanker Delivery lorry is put through more vigourous testing than a van carrying water, but I'm glad I don't drive one!
The tests these tankers are put through make them relatively safe - safe enough to be driven on roads through cities all over the world.
My brother's father in law was driving his car on an open road and met a tanker coming the other way, hit it almost side on, killed instantly and the tanker became a fireball.
Very rare though.
Take reasonable safety measures within your means, and calm down.
Remember more people are killed in domestic violence than plane crashes!
And, apparently, if you stop farting completely there is a risk of death!
Take care out there it's a jungle.
-
try and find online the video of the box of tissues on the parcel shelf taking a dummies head off, its done at the Thatcham place
1 of the ionics guys showed me it
how many of you have your hose reel, bucket etc etc etc unsecured in the back of your van
as with everything, we know the risks we take
-
crash test dummies
i know some boys who will crash test your vans for free just leave the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked
-
One more point I have thought of today is that all these tests were carried out using ypright tanks! What about using lay flat tanks. I am sure that would make a difference as the force created would be completely different
-
when i had water tank installed i phoned my insurers and they don't consider a 400 litre water tank in the back to be a modification.
-
how many builders carry a pallet of bricks and a cement miker in the back of a van ? ? ? ? ? more builders that window cleaners
personally i would hate 1000 L water sat behind with or without ionics clamps holding it down, its alot of weight, 400 L max for me i would say ( i if decided on a van mount )
-
I was just looking on the Tuckerpole site at some of there gear and its interesting what the say under a couple of photos.
www.afd-aquafactors.co.uk/mobile-water-tanks-for-window-cleaners/
Underneath second photo down you have this.
This 360 litre one man operated system is designed to be strapped down in a small Escort sized van. It is easily removed if the vehicle has a dual purpose.
Underneath the forth picture down it says
For safety, all tanks are bolted to the floor of a vehicle using plates and stainless steel studs. We recommend that all vehicles are fitted with a bulkhead. As an optional extra the floor has been sprayed with a SPEEDLINER coating to prevent fluid ingression.
Tucker are a big company and it sounds like they are giving out mixed messages on the same web page. I think if you have a fair size tank it should be bolted to the chassis with bolts that wont rust. Mine is bolted down tight but I've noticed the bolts starting to rust away. Maybe it should be part of the MOT in the future if the tank is a permanent fixture ie not a 25L barrel.
Simon.
-
Mine is bolted down tight but I've noticed the bolts starting to rust away. Maybe it should be part of the MOT in the future if the tank is a permanent fixture ie not a 25L barrel.
Simon.
get them changed for stainless steel bolts :)
-
They say that trailers are safer, but whats safe if you are involved in a accident, the trailer brakes free, it now on it own, travelling anywhere and if its going down hill its gathering speed all the time, its also loaded with 1 ton of water plus the 1/2 ton of equipment and trailer.
I bet that's going to hurt when it hits all them bus passengers waiting for the number 11 bus to town. ;D
As for top gear, they could borrow "del boys" 3 wheeler, they are a corporate image that every one recognizes.
-
I have a break away cable fitted to mine, if the trailer becomes detached from the car, the brakes are automatically applied
-
They say that trailers are safer, but whats safe if you are involved in a accident, the trailer brakes free, it now on it own, travelling anywhere and if its going down hill its gathering speed all the time, its also loaded with 1 ton of water plus the 1/2 ton of equipment and trailer.
I bet that's going to hurt when it hits all them bus passengers waiting for the number 11 bus to town. ;D
As for top gear, they could borrow "del boys" 3 wheeler, they are a corporate image that every one recognizes.
Thats happened to me before, not with a WFP system on it, but it was a trailer.
It caused £35,000 worth of damage and put a 75 year old lady in intensive care for 5 days.
Accidents happen.
-
I KNOW SOMEONE.FORD TRANSIT LWB120 NREG 650LT TANK STRAPED TO FLOOR(STRAPS 10 TON LORRY STRAPS)HAD HEAD ON WITH A VAN DOING ABOUT 25MPH FULL FRONTAL.VANS BOTH WRITE OFF TANK DIDNT MOVE
-
how many builders carry a pallet of bricks and a cement miker in the back of a van ? ? ? ? ? more builders that window cleaners
personally i would hate 1000 L water sat behind with or without ionics clamps holding it down, its alot of weight, 400 L max for me i would say ( i if decided on a van mount )
Good post matt, I have just taken out my 600ltr tank and replaced it with my old flat 400ltr tank. It's not just because its safer, but I was having to refill the 600ltr tank by about 3pm anyway, so I had just as well use the 400ltr and refill it a bit earlier. What I really need is an 800 ltr tank, but then I would need a much bigger van!!
-
I KNOW SOMEONE.FORD TRANSIT LWB120 NREG 650LT TANK STRAPED TO FLOOR(STRAPS 10 TON LORRY STRAPS)HAD HEAD ON WITH A VAN DOING ABOUT 25MPH FULL FRONTAL.VANS BOTH WRITE OFF TANK DIDNT MOVE
right thats it, your off ionics christmas card list
thats not what they want to hear, how every will they sell more " safe " systems ? ? ? ?
-
I KNOW SOMEONE.FORD TRANSIT LWB120 NREG 650LT TANK STRAPED TO FLOOR(STRAPS 10 TON LORRY STRAPS)HAD HEAD ON WITH A VAN DOING ABOUT 25MPH FULL FRONTAL.VANS BOTH WRITE OFF TANK DIDNT MOVE
That wasn't Paul was it Craig?
Just goes to show we can fit them safely, the anchor points must have been good and with 10Ton straps, no wonder it stayed where it was.
The straps I have are used to hold harrier sea Jets onto the decks of carriers, no idea of the rating but there big strong ones.
-
I KNOW SOMEONE.FORD TRANSIT LWB120 NREG 650LT TANK STRAPED TO FLOOR(STRAPS 10 TON LORRY STRAPS)HAD HEAD ON WITH A VAN DOING ABOUT 25MPH FULL FRONTAL.VANS BOTH WRITE OFF TANK DIDNT MOVE
That wasn't Paul was it Craig?
Just goes to show we can fit them safely, the anchor points must have been good and with 10Ton straps, no wonder it stayed where it was.
The straps I have are used to hold harrier sea Jets onto the decks of carriers, no idea of the rating but there big strong ones.
its all about the fixing points though isnt it, as these will allways be the weak point, get a fabricater to make you some that will bolt though the chasis and your away, afterall thats what ionics have done, i belive the first lot they tried were through the floor and with spreader plates, they then decided to go through the chasis, thus much stronger
-
I KNOW SOMEONE.FORD TRANSIT LWB120 NREG 650LT TANK STRAPED TO FLOOR(STRAPS 10 TON LORRY STRAPS)HAD HEAD ON WITH A VAN DOING ABOUT 25MPH FULL FRONTAL.VANS BOTH WRITE OFF TANK DIDNT MOVE
That wasn't Paul was it Craig?
Just goes to show we can fit them safely, the anchor points must have been good and with 10Ton straps, no wonder it stayed where it was.
The straps I have are used to hold harrier sea Jets onto the decks of carriers, no idea of the rating but there big strong ones.
its all about the fixing points though isnt it, as these will allways be the weak point, get a fabricater to make you some that will bolt though the chasis and your away, afterall thats what ionics have done, i belive the first lot they tried were through the floor and with spreader plates, they then decided to go through the chasis, thus much stronger
The first ones were through the floor Matt, with a small spreader plate attached, No way was thet going to hold, the only thing that type of install would do, is to stop your tank sliding around, No way in an impact could it hold.
-
I KNOW SOMEONE.FORD TRANSIT LWB120 NREG 650LT TANK STRAPED TO FLOOR(STRAPS 10 TON LORRY STRAPS)HAD HEAD ON WITH A VAN DOING ABOUT 25MPH FULL FRONTAL.VANS BOTH WRITE OFF TANK DIDNT MOVE
That wasn't Paul was it Craig?
Just goes to show we can fit them safely, the anchor points must have been good and with 10Ton straps, no wonder it stayed where it was.
The straps I have are used to hold harrier sea Jets onto the decks of carriers, no idea of the rating but there big strong ones.
its all about the fixing points though isnt it, as these will allways be the weak point, get a fabricater to make you some that will bolt though the chasis and your away, afterall thats what ionics have done, i belive the first lot they tried were through the floor and with spreader plates, they then decided to go through the chasis, thus much stronger
The first ones were through the floor Matt, with a small spreader plate attached, No way was thet going to hold, the only thing that type of install would do, is to stop your tank sliding around, No way in an impact could it hold.
funny thing is Jeff, i know of 2 well know van converters who install " double or 3/4 sized bed which fold up to a seat, the seat has 3 point seat belts aswell"
guess how they secure the seat frames, spreader plates though the floor, now loads put children in these rear seats and i guess some may have 3 adults in them
ive even known them to be checked over for the DVLA *inspection* SVA test, before they give you plates on imports
-
I suppose it all depends on the size of the spreader plates they install Matt, if it goes from one bolt to another then this seems to be exceptable.
The reason I say this is, when I bought my Tow bar, I noticed it only had 2 large bolts for the chassis, then another 2 went to the rear bumper brackets, but the front end of the Tow bar (right underneath towards the front) the 2 bolts that held it up Had to go through the floor pan, but inside the boot I had a spreader plate that went from one bolt right the way across to the other bolt.
Now this Tow bar is a witter, there were even dimples in the boot provided by the manufactures on where to drill the holes.
So maybe that company you know, puts longer spreader bars in.
-
I KNOW SOMEONE.FORD TRANSIT LWB120 NREG 650LT TANK STRAPED TO FLOOR(STRAPS 10 TON LORRY STRAPS)HAD HEAD ON WITH A VAN DOING ABOUT 25MPH FULL FRONTAL.VANS BOTH WRITE OFF TANK DIDNT MOVE
You dont say how much water he had in it, if it was "empty" I wouldn't be surprised.
How come everyone assumes the "crash" will happen only when you have a full tank :-\
-
guess how they secure the seat frames, spreader plates though the floor, now loads put children in these rear seats and i guess some may have 3 adults in them
Lol, matt now this I find funny.
Are you suggesting that these spreader plates will make you safe? All you need to do is look at p13 of the article and see the ever so amazing spreader plates tearing right through the floor of the van at only 18mph.
We are talking about securing over a tonne of weight, not a chair with kids on it. I know kids are becomming more obese but I have yet to see one that weighs more than a tonne, LOL.
No offense matt, I think you mean well, but you just don't know what you are talking about sometimes. The evidence is right there to see.
Either you havent read this article or you have not understood it. (Have you read it?) Either way, sorry but your advise is dangerous.
-
Looks to me like the new Unger "plug & play" system is safest and most cost effective for the market Ionics is targetting.
Cheaper than the Ionics safe system, no dangerous unevenly distributed loads of liquid to carry, just a powerful filtration system.
Plug in on the job and go for it, fill your tank a bit while you're at it.
-
IMO baffled tanks should be made with many more baffles to restrict the movement of water even further.
It's not the weight of water that is a danger as much as the movement of freely flowing water transfering around violently in the so called baffled tanks in a crash.
So much emphasis is put on securing baffled tanks to the vehicles.
How about manufacturing baffled tanks that restrict the movement of water even further to reduce the risks.
-
Brilliant post. ;)
What's brilliant is that ionics have done it again, they've got us talking about ionics again.
When it's said that stats can be made to prove anything so can vehicle testing. If you position a tank up against a bulkhead then it can't build up enough energy to shift in the same way as being placed half way down the vehicle.
Also in these tests a vehicle moving at 30 mph stops completely in namo seconds. Exactly what situation is needed for this to happen? A vehicle creating the force stated in these tests would go straight through any normal brick wall. Ifyou hit straight on a 30 tonne artic then the tank in the back is really not going to make the slightest difference to the overall outcome.
Yes of course we should secure loads accordingly but just sometimes people will use any possible situation to make themselves the saviours of our own futures, if we just sign up to them.
-
guess how they secure the seat frames, spreader plates though the floor, now loads put children in these rear seats and i guess some may have 3 adults in them
Lol, matt now this I find funny.
Are you suggesting that these spreader plates will make you safe? All you need to do is look at p13 of the article and see the ever so amazing spreader plates tearing right through the floor of the van at only 18mph.
We are talking about securing over a tonne of weight, not a chair with kids on it. I know kids are becomming more obese but I have yet to see one that weighs more than a tonne, LOL.
No offense matt, I think you mean well, but you just don't know what you are talking about sometimes. The evidence is right there to see.
Either you havent read this article or you have not understood it. (Have you read it?) Either way, sorry but your advise is dangerous.
Hmmmmmmm no i havent seen the article
im not advising anything, just having a discussion about how they secure rear seats into " camper conversions that pass the SVA test on seats, afterall are seats not meant to be safe in the event of a RTA, i have at no time advised on spreader plates for securing loads ? ? ? or have i ? ? ? ?
it was more of a discussion on that, if you read my post, i havent mentioned how to secure a tank, though people do it in all different ways, but once again, they know the risk, just like the guy who seatbelted a 250 L into the rear of his car, he knew the risk and decided it was worth it OR the builder who carries a pallet of bricks and his cement mixer OR the people who carry 25 L drums in the boot, we know the risks and if you dont know what a 25 L drum would do hitting the back of your head, then your not that smart
-
Hmmmmmmm no i havent seen the article
Then no offense matt, but I dont think you should comment until you HAVE seen it, That's just common sense surely?
i havent mentioned how to secure a tank, though people do it in all different ways, but once again, they know the risk,
If you had read the mag, then you would understand that often it is that people DONT know the risk, thats exactly the point.
-
Hmmmmmmm no i havent seen the article
Then no offense matt, but I dont think you should comment until you HAVE seen it, That's just common sense surely?
thats the point, im not commenting on it the article, this is afterall a discussion forum and i mentioned to jeff its the way the load it secured to the van, not so much the straps ( afterall the fixing point it likely to be the weak point ) , the discussion for me then evolved into how they fixed seats in camper comversions ( off topic i guess, but hey, i found it interesting that to pass a strict test to drive on the UK roads, they fix seats to carry children or 3 adults wieghing 250 kg ) they use spreader plates
i guess if im not making a comment about this, i shouldnt post, sorry oh police of posting issues
-
vans have max pay load for reason.... insurance company no this when they insure you
i secure my tank with straps but at the front bulk head i had a frame fitted bolted and welded to stop it coming in on top of me £90.00 it cost. hope i never have to try it out
matts right people should no the risk..
-
If you had read the mag, then you would understand that often it is that people DONT know the risk, thats exactly the point.
i tell you what, if some1 doesnt know the risk of driving with 1000 L in the back of his van unsecured, then i would be very s.prised, i expect they know the risk, but choose to take that risk
from what you have said, i expect the article is just a " shock advert" to shock people into buying the system, its been done before, it'll be done again, will people buy the " article " at being nothing more than a " shock advert" ? ? ? ? who knows
-
vans have max pay load for reason.... insurance company no this when they insure you
i secure my tank with straps but at the front bulk head i had a frame fitted bolted and welded to stop it coming in on top of me £90.00 it cost. hope i never have to try it out
matts right people should no the risk..
exactly, you knew the risk, you added to your safety with the 90 quid frame
life is 1 big risk, we all take them when we pull out at that roundabout in front of that lorry ( etc etc )
-
LOL I dont care about off-topic posts matey, I'm a culprit for that myself.
All I'm saying is that you are making comments about the mag article and the whole issue when you aint even seen it.
You went on about spreader plates, and theres a specific point about them in the mag and how they are proven NOT to be safe, and if you'd have read it you would have known that. The way you said it came across like "They use spreader plates becuase they are safe" ie so its ok to use them for tanks, NOT SO.
Also, you said about BLAH BLAH BLAH you didnt say anything you just sang to yourself for 5 mins.
All I'm sayin is you commenting about it when you aint even seen it is a bit ot of order. Saying "I expect its this...." etc is silly mate, just read the article cos otherwise you dont know what your on about and are just being a run-of-the-mill ionic whinger.
-
ok back to topic matey........it wont affect our future as window cleaners.
vans have a max weight to carry and as i said insurance companys no this it is up to us to secure the load we carry...
-
I seem to remember a few years ago that it was PWC Mag's Editor (Philip Hanson) - the political wing of Ionics - who was scare-mongering about a supposed 'ladder ban'.
Can any of you lot see any similarities with this and the 'insurance ban'?
-
I seem to remember a few years ago that it was PWC Mag's Editor (Philip Hanson) - the political wing of Ionics - who was scare-mongering about a supposed 'ladder ban'.
Can any of you lot see any similarities with this and the 'insurance ban'?
I thought it was that Ionics was the military wing of the PCW mag but not to worry.
To answer your question - yes I do see similarities. Knowing insurance companies, they probably wouldn't actually refuse cover. They would probably charge extortionate prices to provide cover without the relevant certification. Refusing cover could lose them money. Charging more for uncertified vehicles could make them more money. Not too hard to figure which way they would go.
-
If ionics are so concerned about this? I wonder if they are going to call all there systems back in and replace the fixings from all there older systems!!
I think is a good reminder for us all to consider how our tanks are installed, worth taking a bit of time and money.
perfect reflection
-
If ionics are so concerned about this? I wonder if they are going to call all there systems back in and replace the fixings from all there older systems!!
I think is a good reminder for us all to consider how our tanks are installed, worth taking a bit of time and money.
perfect reflection
I was just about to say the same thing!!, i bought an ionics system about 3 yrs ago, never been re checked to see that all fixings are still in good order etc. and just because they have crash tested theirs does it mean that no other suppliers are up to the job? I really think this is just a marketing angle for 2008 that they are going to play on it in a major way, for several reasons. I appreciate that the costs involved in testing must be large, but how many other manufacturers are in the position to outlay all that cost initially? The market for systems is so competitive these days and Ionics have to highlight a feature that they can offer that is not matched by anyone else...yet.
At the end of the day, as mentioned before people do take risks and will always do so when it comes down to cost. How many people do you see driving around with missile dogs on parcel shelves, is a dog guard too expensive?!! that would hurt being wacked with a flying dog in a crash, but who cares? Seems like they've got some interest going though!! I just wonder who on here is going to spend an extra couple of grand due to this marketing ploy? any takers??? As for insurance, my system is covered, and they never asked how it was fitted, perhaps with blu-tac. I really think they couldn't give a monkeys, they'll take your money first, ask questions later (when/if u claim!)
Then again maybe i've got it all wrong as i am only a humble w/c !