To that end, when flying, I always wear cotton.
I've played around with the idea of fabing a ground cable to throw down to my crew at the pump when i'm refueling.
Your thoughts?
26M fuel tank installation
-
Frank C
I missed Al's posting earlier, but it seems to me that he perfectly describes the situation:ALX357 wrote:rub hand on non-conductive acrylic sweater in dry weather. then touch doorknob to get zapped. you just grounded the sweater, but at the wrong time -too late. but it would not have sparked if it (and you ) had been in contact with doorknob all along.
- * "rub hand on non-conductive acrylic sweater in dry weather. then touch doorknob to get zapped"
> correlates with fuel delivery static building with nozzle in center of filler
* "then touch doorknob to get zapped. you just grounded the sweater, but at the wrong time -too late"
> oops ... the nozzle just touched the plastic filler rim ... = BOOM
* "but it would not have sparked if it (and you ) had been in contact with doorknob all along"
> correlates with Petro Institute rule to keep nozzle touching the filler rim
YMMV
Frank,Frank C wrote:I don't know if wetting-down the area helps when humidity is extremely low - can't see how it would hurt though ....
YMMV
I guess it depends on what you wet it down with... Now, I bet it could hurt if you just sprayed gas all over the place...
Yeah, yeah, I know that's not what was meant... I had just a wierd visual and decided to share it...
-
Catigale
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10421
- Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 5:59 pm
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
- Location: Admiral .............Catigale 2002X.......Lots of Harpoon Hobie 16 Skiffs....Island 17
- Contact:
Did a little research on the web and Im convinced cell phones lighting gas fires are urban legend - your research may vary....
(Clip from post)
No real-world evidence exists to support these claims. Although Internet rumors have circulated since 1999 to the effect that cell phone use near gas pumps can cause fires or explosions by igniting gasoline vapors (prompting many service stations to post warnings on their pumps), not a single case has ever been documented.
According to Shell Oil, allegedly the source of the information, the email is a complete hoax and did not originate from the company. "We're not aware that there has ever been an incident where this has happened," a Shell representative told Reuters in February 2003. A mobile phone industry spokesperson labeled it an "urban legend."
The earliest rumors connecting wireless phones with refueling fires have been traced back to a 1999 China Post article alleging that an Indonesian driver was badly burned when "a spark from the static electricity in the mobile [phone] ignited the petrol vapor," blowing up his car. Though never independently confirmed, the tale won credulity among cautious petroleum industry executives, in part because some cellular phone manuals shipped during the 1990s contained warnings against using the products anywhere gasoline vapors might be present. But the danger was, and is, purely theoretical. An investigation completed in 2001 by the Center for the Study of Wireless Electromagnetic Compatibility at the University of Oklahoma found "virtually no evidence to suggest that cell phones pose a hazard at gas stations."
Adding to the confusion, more recent research strongly indicates that static electricity from sources other than cell phones can ignite gasoline vapors at the pump and cause vehicular fires, of which there have been many documented cases. Unfortunately, the rumor mill being what it is, this important information has been obfuscated by sketchy email alerts which persist in claiming that some of the fires were caused by "sparks" from mobile phones. Caveat lector.
(Clip from post)
No real-world evidence exists to support these claims. Although Internet rumors have circulated since 1999 to the effect that cell phone use near gas pumps can cause fires or explosions by igniting gasoline vapors (prompting many service stations to post warnings on their pumps), not a single case has ever been documented.
According to Shell Oil, allegedly the source of the information, the email is a complete hoax and did not originate from the company. "We're not aware that there has ever been an incident where this has happened," a Shell representative told Reuters in February 2003. A mobile phone industry spokesperson labeled it an "urban legend."
The earliest rumors connecting wireless phones with refueling fires have been traced back to a 1999 China Post article alleging that an Indonesian driver was badly burned when "a spark from the static electricity in the mobile [phone] ignited the petrol vapor," blowing up his car. Though never independently confirmed, the tale won credulity among cautious petroleum industry executives, in part because some cellular phone manuals shipped during the 1990s contained warnings against using the products anywhere gasoline vapors might be present. But the danger was, and is, purely theoretical. An investigation completed in 2001 by the Center for the Study of Wireless Electromagnetic Compatibility at the University of Oklahoma found "virtually no evidence to suggest that cell phones pose a hazard at gas stations."
Adding to the confusion, more recent research strongly indicates that static electricity from sources other than cell phones can ignite gasoline vapors at the pump and cause vehicular fires, of which there have been many documented cases. Unfortunately, the rumor mill being what it is, this important information has been obfuscated by sketchy email alerts which persist in claiming that some of the fires were caused by "sparks" from mobile phones. Caveat lector.
Last edited by Catigale on Fri Aug 05, 2005 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
mtc
- Captain
- Posts: 545
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 5:06 pm
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26M
- Location: Panama City Beach, Florida 05 M 'Bellaroo' 60hp Merc BF
cell phones while refueling?
Never heard of any evidence to support the explosion theory - however, though not a BOOM factor, what talking on a phone will certainly do is take the refueler's mind off the process and they could hit the premium button instead of the regular.
I'd feel more comfortable if those idiots who insist on smoking as they refuel would stop doing that.
Didn't they see 'The Birds' and what could happen?
Never heard of any evidence to support the explosion theory - however, though not a BOOM factor, what talking on a phone will certainly do is take the refueler's mind off the process and they could hit the premium button instead of the regular.
I'd feel more comfortable if those idiots who insist on smoking as they refuel would stop doing that.
Didn't they see 'The Birds' and what could happen?