Plastic funnel and plastic fuel can-is it safe?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Uk
Age: 56
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plastic funnel and plastic fuel can-is it safe?
Hello
I have a GRP/rotax aeroplane which I refuel outside using ordinary petrol station unleaded.
I have a plastic funnel with a metal gauze filter into which I pour direct from a plastic 20litre can.
Whilst I have been doing this for sometime without any problems someone has told me this practice is dangerous due to a static build up risk although they were not aware of any actual incidents
Should I be concerned? If so would bonding help?
I have a GRP/rotax aeroplane which I refuel outside using ordinary petrol station unleaded.
I have a plastic funnel with a metal gauze filter into which I pour direct from a plastic 20litre can.
Whilst I have been doing this for sometime without any problems someone has told me this practice is dangerous due to a static build up risk although they were not aware of any actual incidents
Should I be concerned? If so would bonding help?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All highly flammable fuels develop a risk of fire through static buildup when being poured. The risk is reduced with plastic containers and fuel tanks, but it's never completely eliminated.
The risk varies according to many variables such as ambient temperature, elevation, the type of fuel, it's flash point and the vapour pressure.
There is also the danger of static buildup from synthetic clothing and other external sources, that can ignite volatile fuel vapours.
As a result, one has to exercise extreme care when pouring or pumping highly flammable fuels between containers and tanks.
Bonding would most certainly be a wise move in your circumstances.
Here's an excellent discourse on static buildup in fuel movement, from a Canadian website:
Flammable and Combustible Liquids (Static Electricity) - How Do I Work Safely with Flammable and Combustible Liquids?: OSH Answers
By far the largest number of refuelling fires are from a lack of awareness of external sources of ignition, and a lack of awareness of hot engine components.
Refuelling in the manner you are using leads to a greater potential for fuel splash, which is often also a reason for unexpected fuel ignition.
The risk varies according to many variables such as ambient temperature, elevation, the type of fuel, it's flash point and the vapour pressure.
There is also the danger of static buildup from synthetic clothing and other external sources, that can ignite volatile fuel vapours.
As a result, one has to exercise extreme care when pouring or pumping highly flammable fuels between containers and tanks.
Bonding would most certainly be a wise move in your circumstances.
Here's an excellent discourse on static buildup in fuel movement, from a Canadian website:
Flammable and Combustible Liquids (Static Electricity) - How Do I Work Safely with Flammable and Combustible Liquids?: OSH Answers
By far the largest number of refuelling fires are from a lack of awareness of external sources of ignition, and a lack of awareness of hot engine components.
Refuelling in the manner you are using leads to a greater potential for fuel splash, which is often also a reason for unexpected fuel ignition.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plastic jerry cans always make me nervous. I have no idea whether my concerns are based on truth or supposition, but I always think that if I am at the petrol station or the airfield and the whole lot goes "pop", would I rather have the fire in a metal container which is liklely to remain in one piece or a plastic one which will probably melt ......
I pour about 8,000 litres a year in to my aircraft from jerry cans and I would like to think that I am careful. I am constantly amazed to see how casual some people are when handling fuel.
I pour about 8,000 litres a year in to my aircraft from jerry cans and I would like to think that I am careful. I am constantly amazed to see how casual some people are when handling fuel.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not an expert on this, but it seems to me you can reduce the static buildup, and thus the risk, by trying to reduce/eliminate sloshing. If you have to pour, pour with as little sloshing as possible, and try to maintain a bond between all components at all times.
Yes, that's hard, but I once saw a very neat solution to this. I've never used it myself but I would buy it immediately if I ever find myself in your situation.
The solution is essentially a piece of hose with a crude one-way valve in it. You put the end with the one-way valve in the can, and the other end in the aircrafts fuel tank. You then shake the one-way valve end up and down. This pushes the fuel up into the hose until the siphoning action starts. The fuel then drains all by itself into the lower tank. Very controlled, no sloshing, no splashing. And since you can simply put the fuel can on top of the wing or fuselage, there is a bond between the can and the aircraft anyway.
Here's one example. But it must be possible to find or build one that has a metal mesh filter in them as well.
Yes, that's hard, but I once saw a very neat solution to this. I've never used it myself but I would buy it immediately if I ever find myself in your situation.
The solution is essentially a piece of hose with a crude one-way valve in it. You put the end with the one-way valve in the can, and the other end in the aircrafts fuel tank. You then shake the one-way valve end up and down. This pushes the fuel up into the hose until the siphoning action starts. The fuel then drains all by itself into the lower tank. Very controlled, no sloshing, no splashing. And since you can simply put the fuel can on top of the wing or fuselage, there is a bond between the can and the aircraft anyway.
Here's one example. But it must be possible to find or build one that has a metal mesh filter in them as well.
Last edited by BackPacker; 4th Sep 2013 at 08:43.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst one cannot argue about Static, thousands of cars, lawnmowers generators etc. are fuelled every minute of every day static is ,indeed a very rare cause of fire.....the aircraftshould bond through it's (conductive) tyres,just like a road-vehicle....what about the can?- stood on the ground until you lift to pour?...I'd suggest a car tank slops the fuel around an awful lot more than a 'plane or motorcycle which should both be in balance whilst moving!
Filtering is another grossly exaggerated bogey.....do you really believe that a dispensing facility will invest several thousand pounds in a precision calibrated pump, only to ruin itwith contaminated fuel?
Course not! final filter is normally a dense felt to ensure only pure clean spirit goes through the metering chambers.
any crap is normally due to your own dirty containers and careless handling. good houskeeping should ensure clean fuel.
A lot of the precautions verge on anal retentive....aircraft should "bond" to ground, filler-neck is unlikely to be painted internally, therefore the funnel will sit there and "bond" rest the neck of the can on the funnel, your bonding link is complete.....the real danger, as onetrack pointed out, is synthetic clothing,-which a good pilot should not be wearing anyway!
@ Backpacker...It's a jiggle-syphon plenty on fleabay and motoring shops.
@ T.I.M.Username.....a metal container is a potential bomb, a plastic container is likely to bee cooled below melting-point by the contents....the "dry" portion will heat-soften and act as a fusible vent, so a much safer descent into a blazing inferno.
Any petrol (avgas) container is far more dangerous when "empty"- full of fumes- than it is when full of liquid.
I was told by a professional that a lit match, dropped into a full underground tank, would be immediately extinguished.....vapours @100% concentration, no oxygen, cool liquid....OTOH. an empty tank has drawn in a load of air to replace the dispensed fuel...a bomb waiting to explode!
The road tankers never earthed, before dumping 3,000 gallons in the hole....the hoses had a spiral wire armouring and brass connection couplings so I guess that did the bonding....but I always thought concrete and tarmac were insulators.
anyone remember the 50's vogue for dangling a chain from the back of a car, to earth static and ward off travel sickness?
later, they sold conductive rubber strips which trailed along the ground (and wore away so you bought another)
Filtering is another grossly exaggerated bogey.....do you really believe that a dispensing facility will invest several thousand pounds in a precision calibrated pump, only to ruin itwith contaminated fuel?
Course not! final filter is normally a dense felt to ensure only pure clean spirit goes through the metering chambers.
any crap is normally due to your own dirty containers and careless handling. good houskeeping should ensure clean fuel.
A lot of the precautions verge on anal retentive....aircraft should "bond" to ground, filler-neck is unlikely to be painted internally, therefore the funnel will sit there and "bond" rest the neck of the can on the funnel, your bonding link is complete.....the real danger, as onetrack pointed out, is synthetic clothing,-which a good pilot should not be wearing anyway!
@ Backpacker...It's a jiggle-syphon plenty on fleabay and motoring shops.
@ T.I.M.Username.....a metal container is a potential bomb, a plastic container is likely to bee cooled below melting-point by the contents....the "dry" portion will heat-soften and act as a fusible vent, so a much safer descent into a blazing inferno.
Any petrol (avgas) container is far more dangerous when "empty"- full of fumes- than it is when full of liquid.
I was told by a professional that a lit match, dropped into a full underground tank, would be immediately extinguished.....vapours @100% concentration, no oxygen, cool liquid....OTOH. an empty tank has drawn in a load of air to replace the dispensed fuel...a bomb waiting to explode!
The road tankers never earthed, before dumping 3,000 gallons in the hole....the hoses had a spiral wire armouring and brass connection couplings so I guess that did the bonding....but I always thought concrete and tarmac were insulators.
anyone remember the 50's vogue for dangling a chain from the back of a car, to earth static and ward off travel sickness?
later, they sold conductive rubber strips which trailed along the ground (and wore away so you bought another)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: South of France
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sincerely hope, 172driver, that you are keeping up with latest H&S regulations and requirements!
Given that you may find yourself on an apron or airfield somewhere within 100 metres of an aeroplane or fuel tank, I trust you have invested in and are wearing at all times, your Anti-Static Hi-Viz vest. For refuelling, I think one should go 'the whole hog' and get a complete set of vest, trousers, gloves, hard hat and anti-splash mask.
After refuelling, it is of course acceptable to remove all this clothing before you strap yourself in to the by now, completely full, flying petrol tank.
Given that you may find yourself on an apron or airfield somewhere within 100 metres of an aeroplane or fuel tank, I trust you have invested in and are wearing at all times, your Anti-Static Hi-Viz vest. For refuelling, I think one should go 'the whole hog' and get a complete set of vest, trousers, gloves, hard hat and anti-splash mask.
After refuelling, it is of course acceptable to remove all this clothing before you strap yourself in to the by now, completely full, flying petrol tank.
Pre EASA night flying in a Jodel DR1050, on a frosty night. After landing, fuelled from metal cans, earthing each with wire to the exhaust. Put aircraft in hangar and closed doors. Put empty cans etc in car. Got in, and before switching anything on, unzipped leather jacket (nylon lining), worn over wool sweater. Flashes of static electricity were very noticeable in the dark.
PS Currently using a plastic funnel, and the earthing wire's got lost. I put in £2338 mogas in 2012.
PS Currently using a plastic funnel, and the earthing wire's got lost. I put in £2338 mogas in 2012.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a gut-feeling that the risk of fire/explosion through Static discharge , is on a par with the risk of mobile phones on filling-station forecourts.
No known case of the latter, worldwide, ever
10 years ago, the UK fuel companies would close any site turning over anything less than 4 1/2 MILLION litres of petrol, per annum,no doubt, with increased regulation, the figure to break-even, is now higher.
many times i've undressed in the dark and seen a static discharge display, wether the outside, free-air conditions with pouring jerrycans, would have the possibility of the correct fume concentration for a static spark to ignite, is anything more than a myth, I'm not qualified to say.
Perhaps someone can point to something other rhan the Hindenberg (which was still flying and the touching of "ground" via the mooring -mast, APPARENTLY caused the static-discharge that set it alight.
Aircraft are not powered by Hydrogen....non-military have normally landed and thus equalised to Earth potential BEFORE refuelling.
Anyone care to refute my argument?
No known case of the latter, worldwide, ever
10 years ago, the UK fuel companies would close any site turning over anything less than 4 1/2 MILLION litres of petrol, per annum,no doubt, with increased regulation, the figure to break-even, is now higher.
many times i've undressed in the dark and seen a static discharge display, wether the outside, free-air conditions with pouring jerrycans, would have the possibility of the correct fume concentration for a static spark to ignite, is anything more than a myth, I'm not qualified to say.
Perhaps someone can point to something other rhan the Hindenberg (which was still flying and the touching of "ground" via the mooring -mast, APPARENTLY caused the static-discharge that set it alight.
Aircraft are not powered by Hydrogen....non-military have normally landed and thus equalised to Earth potential BEFORE refuelling.
Anyone care to refute my argument?
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when bowsers were connected to the till via radio link the mobile phone used to stuff up the telemetry. I suspect that that was the actual cause of the no phones in service stations guff.
my thinking is that the red plastic can when used with the yellow integral (screw on) pourer is actually totally safe since the pourer grounds the can to the tank spout. also a far better solution to pouring fuel into a tank in the wind.
my thinking is that the red plastic can when used with the yellow integral (screw on) pourer is actually totally safe since the pourer grounds the can to the tank spout. also a far better solution to pouring fuel into a tank in the wind.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LKBU
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have personally seen the remains of an aircraft (AN-2, to be specific) that caught fire from a static spark during refuelling from plastic cans. However, these were cans of unknown origin, and not all cans are created equal. There are antistatic plastic cans and funnels for flammable liquids, made of slightly conductive plastic. This is typically achieved by adding a carbon filler, so most of these plastics are black.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm ... not precisely aviation related - but watch the process of static buildup as she climbs in and out of the car. How many times have you been seriously "zapped", as you climbed out of your car?
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roa...tatic_fire.pdf
As I previously stated, static buildup on synthetic clothing, and external sources of ignition, are of more concern, than the buildup of static created by fuel moving from one container to another.
Fuel vapour can travel a considerable distance on the wind and contact a source of ignition that you did not even know was there, or did not consider.
I have seen an entire large fuel distribution depot burn completely to the ground, because a motorist towing a caravan (trailer home) spilt petrol whilst refuelling in the fuel depot (the depot had bowsers to supply the public, as it was in a remote country town).
The vapours from the spilt petrol travelled on the wind into the caravan, where it was ignited by the tiny flame in the LPG fridge.
It was a pretty spectacular show, I can tell you - I sighted the flames from 60 kms away, and the entire depot was toast inside an hour.
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roa...tatic_fire.pdf
As I previously stated, static buildup on synthetic clothing, and external sources of ignition, are of more concern, than the buildup of static created by fuel moving from one container to another.
Fuel vapour can travel a considerable distance on the wind and contact a source of ignition that you did not even know was there, or did not consider.
I have seen an entire large fuel distribution depot burn completely to the ground, because a motorist towing a caravan (trailer home) spilt petrol whilst refuelling in the fuel depot (the depot had bowsers to supply the public, as it was in a remote country town).
The vapours from the spilt petrol travelled on the wind into the caravan, where it was ignited by the tiny flame in the LPG fridge.
It was a pretty spectacular show, I can tell you - I sighted the flames from 60 kms away, and the entire depot was toast inside an hour.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good finish
I do exactly as you do with plastic funnel and plastic can then to earth things I connect a car jump lead to the plane exhaust, with a large screwdriver clipped to the other end of the jump lead which I hold in the funnel when pouring the fuel in.
I do exactly as you do with plastic funnel and plastic can then to earth things I connect a car jump lead to the plane exhaust, with a large screwdriver clipped to the other end of the jump lead which I hold in the funnel when pouring the fuel in.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably a bit late now, but this Jiggle Syphon on Ebay has a longer than usual hose at 2.65m and an in line mesh filter.
10894 Medium Self Priming Jiggle Syphon Pump Hose 265cm Fuel Petrol Water Fluid | eBay
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 426 Likes
on
225 Posts
What I've learned here is never get undressed whilst refuelling an aircraft.