Pressurized fueling accident (Crickets...)

MTPyle

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,346
Reaction
2,793
Sorry Mike, but I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.... You say there's zero data to show the PP is more dangerous than other methods of fueling? The whole point of this thread was to discuss the one which just exploded. And as far as the "bunch of opinions" goes, we have heard from people who have not only been in the sport for many more years than you and work in an industry where he "knows" the physics and engineering of pressure vessels (I have to take MyShot for his word). If anything, this conversation and the input from many who have vastly more desert racing experience, and some knowledge of pressure vessels should be taken as an opportunity to look into not only the topic of safety in fueling but possibly a standardized fueling method in the future, for not only safety of participants and volunteers but the spectators. Not to mention the sport continuing rather possibly than being shut down. I have been in the sport since the early 90's and have used just about every method of fueling available,(some over the years were pretty sketchy I might add) except a PP and I gotta say when I first saw one I immediately thought no way I will never use one. Having a pressurized vessel full of fuel in an uncontrolled environ like the desert does not sit well with me. Towers were bad enough, but add pressurization to the mix and I'm out. But that's just me.

I realize you have a vested interest in continuing to use the PP as you made an investment in purchasing one, but it is clear you've just gotten defensive on the topic or are stickling your head in the sand.


Jerry,

There is no data or known cases of PP failure when used properly. The topic of this thread was a system that was modified. The fact is the PRV was actually doing its job and working fine, right before they defeated it. So I am correct that this is zero data to show PP is unsafe when used properly. In fact we have mounds of usage and data that proves it is safe when used properly.

I am not defensive because I have a vested interest. I paid more for my dump cans and transfer pumps than I did for the PP. I am just arguing because I know what I am talking about and have used all the fueling options this sport has to offer. I feel PP is the safest of all and clearly over 80 teams agree with me. I think you guys assume its just about speed and thats not the case.

When I heard about this failure I was ready to stop using the PP or making mods to fix the problem. When I found out it was used improperly I was again happy with my my PP. So to say I only defend it is because of money is wrong. I am the only one on here that has used all types of fueling including PP and I am the only one dumb enough to post on here. LOL

Some of you guys just don't have the experience or information to know what you are talking about. You read some of the post and respond like you have some value to add. Fact is the ones racing and spending the money are picking what they use. Not a bunch of guys on the internet. This topic went from good intentions and could have been productive to a bunch of nonsense. Comparing our sport to Nascar or Formula one is a waste of time. We still have guys fueling with dump cans in shorts and T-shirts, where is the thread about that?

Mike
 

MTPyle

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,346
Reaction
2,793
Myshot,

Your intentions are good. But pretty sure all of the racing orgs could care less what some guy says about a system that all the top team have been using safely for years. You are basing your position on a modified system and a hypothetical scenario that has not happened in the real world. Your cry is that it could happen so let's ban the PP.

You would want all the teams to go back to dump cans and transferring fuel on race day? We have lots of proof that is dangerous and not a good solution. So you are against a system that is proven to be safe for a system that has proven to not be safe?

Your opinon that he top teams only care about speed is wrong. I talked to many teams that use PP before I bought our PP and all of them feel like its safer, buy far. And after using it I agree, it is safer. Our team is safer with the PP on race day than dump cans or towers. Thats what matters.

These top teams that push for safety and donate 10's of thousands to groups like Motorsports safety to help make us safer. It's not just about speed and money. To say all the teams only have PP because they are selfish and only care about speed is wrong.

If you got your way we would go backwards and be less safe than we are now. I think its best to try and make what we have safer, which is what Vince is doing. Be part of the solution not the problem. If you were on my team I would not be so kind, there are productive ways to improve safety and your way is not one of them.

Mike
 

green787

Well-Known Member
Posts
10,021
Reaction
2,468
This is your new gas cap..... screw it on to the filler neck and the problem is solved..... or remain ignorant..... it's your choice.....


At the 2:49 mark is the whole problem...... He's using a a non vented fuel cap like the one on my 1980 C-60....

 
Last edited:

MTPyle

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,346
Reaction
2,793
Green,

Thats a great added safety solution. Not sure why you have to find a great solution like this and then post what you did. why resort to calling people ignorant if they don't use this solution?

Mike
 

green787

Well-Known Member
Posts
10,021
Reaction
2,468
Green,

Thats a great added safety solution. Not sure why you have to find a great solution like this and then post what you did. why resort to calling people ignorant if they don't use this solution?

Mike

Because on RDC people have the right to remain ignorant..... I was addressing those people.....

Also if you don't know something you are ignorant..... Not YOU, but a person can be ignorant of the facts or solution..... That's not "name calling"....
 
Last edited:

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
12,593
Reaction
7,668
Mike- Everything works properly when used by design... Until there is a failure, either human or mechanical. A water heater vent for a WATER heater is being used on a GASOLINE tank. Can we start there?
 

McCredie A

Well-Known Member
Posts
702
Reaction
266
Mike- Everything works properly when used by design... Until there is a failure, either human or mechanical. A water heater vent for a WATER heater is being used on a GASOLINE tank. Can we start there?

That might be a great place to start. But, I am at a loss on why it is Mike's job to defend it. He stated his opinion based off his research. You have done the same. Why not reach out to the manufacturer or a sanctioning body? If we all what what is best why beat each other up on RDC? Let's take action to improve the systems....
 

green787

Well-Known Member
Posts
10,021
Reaction
2,468
Just plug up the hole that had the sketchy water heater over pressure valve and use "my" gas cap set at 25psi and forget it......!!!! You know.... "Set it, and forget it".....???? Admittedly it was made for water, but rubber is rubber and just replace it more often......

 

cynicwanderer

Well-Known Member
Posts
304
Reaction
329
the only way one can objectively determine the risk of a design/approach is to have some third party do a risk analysis. typically, this is done by listing out all the possible failure mode (design, systemic and human) and assign two grades to it (e.g. 1-5). the first grade is the likelihood of a specific failure (i.e. very unlikely to very common) and the other grade is the impact (from minimal to almost everyone dies+large environmental impact). these are then multiplied together to arrive at a risk score for a specific failure. all of the scores are then added/summarized in order to asses which design/approach has the lower risk overall.

for example, when a seem pops on a dump can (common if older and not checked), at most 20gal will dump to the ground and if it manages to get ignited, burn like 10-15minutes in your pit and maybe take out the truck and maybe hurt someone. also, you are more likely to control this fire with several fire extinguishers. compared to if a pressure pro bursts or pops a leak (rare), and sprays fuel everywhere, which ignites causing an air burst and then the remainder of the 200gals that leaks to the ground will burn for an hour or more and might catch a truck/buggy on fire in the adjacent pit in addition to your own and possible hurt people in your and the adjacent pit. also, 200gal fire will be hard to control with a couple of fire extinguishers at hand.

the fuel can failures and even fires might happen more frequently but have less impact, than a PP incident, which happens rarely, but if it does can be far worse than a dump can.

E.g. cars catch on fire often, but the impact is usually small, compared to a GA plane catching on fire and the houses around them when they crash into a house (rare), but guess which one makes more news.

you'd want a group of people (some outsiders and some insiders, like engineers, firefighters, EMTs, etc...) to do a risk assessment like this, rather than the designer or user, since they have a bias.

eventually, the insurance companies will get involve and dictate what's safe or not for our sport if we don't use common sense.

oh and you wouldn't believe how often people say "oh, but when I use this equipment/approach it's safer, because...."
 
Last edited:

green787

Well-Known Member
Posts
10,021
Reaction
2,468
If we had a PP system we could fill with water...... I will volunteer to be the moron that puts too much pressure into the tank with the two regulators..... that part looks easy..... Hopefully "my" gas cap (that's internet for sharing) will go off at 25 psi and I will know to not try to put anymore pressure into the system.....I will do the first regulator perfect.... set it to 10psi and tighten the locking nut..... Then some super model babes come by and start asking questions..... I get all flustered and forget what I'm doing and try to run up the second regulator to 50lbs before the relief valve goes off at 25psi..... We need to "see what will happen"..... but I don't have the means to buy one just to test it..... But if you need me to play the Guber that fumbles with the air pressure in the training video, I would travel for that......
 
Last edited:

JerryB

Well-Known Member
Posts
84
Reaction
102
Jerry,

There is no data or known cases of PP failure when used properly. The topic of this thread was a system that was modified. The fact is the PRV was actually doing its job and working fine, right before they defeated it. So I am correct that this is zero data to show PP is unsafe when used properly. In fact we have mounds of usage and data that proves it is safe when used properly.

I am not defensive because I have a vested interest. I paid more for my dump cans and transfer pumps than I did for the PP. I am just arguing because I know what I am talking about and have used all the fueling options this sport has to offer. I feel PP is the safest of all and clearly over 80 teams agree with me. I think you guys assume its just about speed and thats not the case.

When I heard about this failure I was ready to stop using the PP or making mods to fix the problem. When I found out it was used improperly I was again happy with my my PP. So to say I only defend it is because of money is wrong. I am the only one on here that has used all types of fueling including PP and I am the only one dumb enough to post on here. LOL

Some of you guys just don't have the experience or information to know what you are talking about. You read some of the post and respond like you have some value to add. Fact is the ones racing and spending the money are picking what they use. Not a bunch of guys on the internet. This topic went from good intentions and could have been productive to a bunch of nonsense. Comparing our sport to Nascar or Formula one is a waste of time. We still have guys fueling with dump cans in shorts and T-shirts, where is the thread about that?

Mike
Mike, I have stayed out of this convo up till yesterday, just been sitting back eating popcorn watching the entertainment and devolution of the conversation like they unfortunately normally do. And yes, like you said, and I pointed out in my post, I personally have not used the PP. And I made a choice if I was to be in a position to so I would pass as it doesn't look safe to me.

All I was saying was a "couple" of people here have expressed some valid concerns and pointed out what appear to be some design flaws, as it sits now.... Based on the recent failure. This doesn't mean it can't be improved or made safe by implementing a few design updates, additional safety features or certifications.

My point was, let's wade through the BS arm chair pit crew critiques, maybe use the opportunity to do an actual analytical analysis of the safety flaws and strengths to make it better. Stop letting yourself get sucked into the argument and help be part of the solution. There are clearly some flaws with the PP and anyone who denies it is simply ignoring them, for their own personal reasons. Let's look at this problem with an open mind and utilize critical thinking rather than emotion.
Jerry
 

jon coleman

Well-Known Member
Posts
7,261
Reaction
3,932
Because on RDC people have the right to remain ignorant..... I was addressing those people.....

Also if you don't know something you are ignorant..... Not YOU, but a person can be ignorant of the facts or solution..... That's not "name calling"....
Only on rDc does Everyone have a right to stay stupid( slightly🥴
 

Robin Hood

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,283
Reaction
1,087
Myshot,

Your intentions are good. But pretty sure all of the racing orgs could care less what some guy says about a system that all the top team have been using safely for years. You are basing your position on a modified system and a hypothetical scenario that has not happened in the real world. Your cry is that it could happen so let's ban the PP.

You would want all the teams to go back to dump cans and transferring fuel on race day? We have lots of proof that is dangerous and not a good solution. So you are against a system that is proven to be safe for a system that has proven to not be safe?

Your opinon that he top teams only care about speed is wrong. I talked to many teams that use PP before I bought our PP and all of them feel like its safer, buy far. And after using it I agree, it is safer. Our team is safer with the PP on race day than dump cans or towers. Thats what matters.

These top teams that push for safety and donate 10's of thousands to groups like Motorsports safety to help make us safer. It's not just about speed and money. To say all the teams only have PP because they are selfish and only care about speed is wrong.

If you got your way we would go backwards and be less safe than we are now. I think its best to try and make what we have safer, which is what Vince is doing. Be part of the solution not the problem. If you were on my team I would not be so kind, there are productive ways to improve safety and your way is not one of them.

Mike

Mike...Where is the data that says dump cans are not safe? Dump cans have been used by more teams, for more years, than towers or PP, and they can be used safely with the proper training. I think the biggest point being overlooked by some, is that when things go bad with a tower or pressure pro they can go really bad, really quick. Are you prepared for that? I will assume that your crew is trained to use the PP, but are they trained to handle a spill, fire or accident involving up to 200 gallons of fuel? I consider the McMillins a very professional team relative to our sport and they were not prepared to deal with the fuel dumping out of the vent.
 

43mod

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,411
Reaction
2,754
We used to ground all of our polly tanks at each gas well. 6ft g rod w One wire to the ss tank valve fitting and one to the ss inlet fitting near the top. Super safe pro active move for us to do. The only two tank fires i have seen in 42 years were on grounded tanks cuased by static electricity from venting gas. So much for by the book or better eliminates issues.
 

MTPyle

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,346
Reaction
2,793
Bottom line is Myshot sent everyone emails to bring up his concern. Those people will figure out how they want to handle it. Pretty sure they will not be asking us on RDC about our opinion. LOL

I like the solution green found for added level of safety. I may do that on our system as it can’t hurt.

Vince is already working on a kit to make sure the one failure (again from misuse) can not happen again.

I have heard BITD has already put together a safety group for next season to help mitigate the risk of fueling in the pits.

We are making good progress and I think everyone takes this very serious. I know we do and I know the teams I have talked to do as well.

Mike
 

Slippery P

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,234
Reaction
1,743
1-Use the Pressure Pro as designed.
2-Make sure the fuel cell is properly set up to use a Pressure Pro for fueling.
3-Have dedicated fuel guys on your team who’s only job is to Prep the Pressure Pro and associated components, And fuel the truck. That way these guys know the system inside and out, no newbs fueling the truck.
4-safety gear for all pit guys participating in pitting the truck as well as a coordinated plan of attack to deal with a fuel spill type of event.

Put these things in place on your team and take them seriously, we fuel a TT for many years with a Pressure Pro and not once had any issue.
 

Josh 8

Well-Known Member
Posts
562
Reaction
709
Streams of yellow fluid are arcing back and forth with this thread!
D50FA0AD-6A3C-4D64-836D-1BB2E7453555.jpeg
 

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
12,593
Reaction
7,668
" I consider the McMillins a very professional team relative to our sport and they were not prepared to deal with the fuel dumping out of the vent."

Not only that, but does everyone realize that the Pressure Pro actually pressurized the fuel cell in that situation? That is why the fuel is spraying back out of the functioning Redhead. So now do promoters make every team build their entire fuel system, not just the PP, but everything from the fuel pump back out to the filler to handle a pressurized system? The PP worked great, but the fuel lines blew off the cell and fuel sprayed everywhere and caught fire... But it's all safe!
 
Top