|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#161
October 30th 04, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, Thomas Moats wrote: > > >>>> totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being > >>>> drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount > >>>> of restriction from the line. > > >>> That is bull. > > >> Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working > >> fuel pump. > > > If your fuel pump is working why would you would you drain it that way? > > It is very time consuming. You will not pull 72 liters or 19 gallons in > > a half hour. > > Are you sure? Let's do a little math. A quick Google on "electric fuel > pump" gph shows us automotive pumps with volume flowrates of from 43 to > 220 gph on the first page alone. Take the lowest-rated one (43 gph). Half > of 43 gallons per 60 minutes is 21.5 gallons per 30 minutes. The average automotive OEM not a aftermarket high flow pump is 19 to 30 GPH ( Gallons per hour ) not the advertised GPH of the high performance pumps on the first page of your google search. Pumps as a rule do not deliver the maximum advertised GPH when plumed in. There are a lot of reasons for this. One of the biggest is the size and lengths of the lines the pump must push the fluid through. The same holds true for the supply side of the pump. The amount of restriction in the filter must also be considered. You will never see the pumps rated flow, especially through the very small opening of the Schrader valve. But for argument sake the highest average for OEM is 30 GPH, is a max of 15 gallons in 30 minutes, if there is no restriction involved, but we know there is. I routinely fill 2 and 5 gallon fuel cans for my home power equipment via the fuel pressure Schrader valve. It takes roughly 7 minutes to fill the 2 gallon can. So 3.5 minutes ( for one gallon ) x 19 gallons is 66.5 minutes. The pump is new, well less than a year old. I can shave a about a half a minute if I remove the Schrader valve core. 3 x 19 = 57 minutes. 
|
| Ads |
|
#162
October 30th 04, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, Thomas Moats wrote: > > >>>> totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being > >>>> drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount > >>>> of restriction from the line. > > >>> That is bull. > > >> Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working > >> fuel pump. > > > If your fuel pump is working why would you would you drain it that way? > > It is very time consuming. You will not pull 72 liters or 19 gallons in > > a half hour. > > Are you sure? Let's do a little math. A quick Google on "electric fuel > pump" gph shows us automotive pumps with volume flowrates of from 43 to > 220 gph on the first page alone. Take the lowest-rated one (43 gph). Half > of 43 gallons per 60 minutes is 21.5 gallons per 30 minutes. The average automotive OEM not a aftermarket high flow pump is 19 to 30 GPH ( Gallons per hour ) not the advertised GPH of the high performance pumps on the first page of your google search. Pumps as a rule do not deliver the maximum advertised GPH when plumed in. There are a lot of reasons for this. One of the biggest is the size and lengths of the lines the pump must push the fluid through. The same holds true for the supply side of the pump. The amount of restriction in the filter must also be considered. You will never see the pumps rated flow, especially through the very small opening of the Schrader valve. But for argument sake the highest average for OEM is 30 GPH, is a max of 15 gallons in 30 minutes, if there is no restriction involved, but we know there is. I routinely fill 2 and 5 gallon fuel cans for my home power equipment via the fuel pressure Schrader valve. It takes roughly 7 minutes to fill the 2 gallon can. So 3.5 minutes ( for one gallon ) x 19 gallons is 66.5 minutes. The pump is new, well less than a year old. I can shave a about a half a minute if I remove the Schrader valve core. 3 x 19 = 57 minutes.
|
|
#163
October 30th 04, 07:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thomas Moats wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message > ... > >>Thomas Moats wrote: >> >> >>>"Denny" > wrote in message .. . >>> >>> >>>>"Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... >>>> >>>> >>>>><snip> >>>>> >>>>>>>If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ >>>>>> >>>>>>No,, about half an hour maximum will empty a 72 liter tank - and >>>>>>totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being >>>>>>drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount >>>>>>of restriction from the line. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>> >>>>>That is bull. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working fuel >>>>pump. >>>> >>>>Denny >>>> >>>> >>> >>>If your fuel pump is working why would you would you drain it that way? It > > is > >>>very time consuming. You will not pull 72 liters or 19 gallons in a half > > hour. > >>> >>I believe the original poster said transfer pump, not the car's fuel >>pump. That method would work just fine. >> >> >>Matt >> > > Yes he was referring to a transfer pump. Even with a transfer pump, he will not > remove 19 gallons or 72 liters in a half an hour. The lines are too small in > diameter. There is restriction from both the pump in the tank and fuel filter. > Then once the return line is no longer under fluid the possibility of sucking > air if the regulator is of an open center design. Which means you can no longer > pump fluid. > > I thought I could find a flow table with a quick search, but no luck yet. I think you'll find that even a 1/4" tube will flow a lot more gasoline that you might guess. 19 gallons in 30 minutes is only 0.63 GPM, and that is really a very low flow rate given any pressure at all. Matt
|
|
#164
October 30th 04, 07:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thomas Moats wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message > ... > >>Thomas Moats wrote: >> >> >>>"Denny" > wrote in message .. . >>> >>> >>>>"Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... >>>> >>>> >>>>><snip> >>>>> >>>>>>>If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ >>>>>> >>>>>>No,, about half an hour maximum will empty a 72 liter tank - and >>>>>>totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being >>>>>>drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount >>>>>>of restriction from the line. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>><snip> >>>>>>> >>>>>That is bull. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working fuel >>>>pump. >>>> >>>>Denny >>>> >>>> >>> >>>If your fuel pump is working why would you would you drain it that way? It > > is > >>>very time consuming. You will not pull 72 liters or 19 gallons in a half > > hour. > >>> >>I believe the original poster said transfer pump, not the car's fuel >>pump. That method would work just fine. >> >> >>Matt >> > > Yes he was referring to a transfer pump. Even with a transfer pump, he will not > remove 19 gallons or 72 liters in a half an hour. The lines are too small in > diameter. There is restriction from both the pump in the tank and fuel filter. > Then once the return line is no longer under fluid the possibility of sucking > air if the regulator is of an open center design. Which means you can no longer > pump fluid. > > I thought I could find a flow table with a quick search, but no luck yet. I think you'll find that even a 1/4" tube will flow a lot more gasoline that you might guess. 19 gallons in 30 minutes is only 0.63 GPM, and that is really a very low flow rate given any pressure at all. Matt
|
|
#165
October 30th 04, 07:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message ... > Thomas Moats wrote: > > > "Full_Name" > wrote in message > > ... > > > >>On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:00:03 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio > > wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Have you all observed that not one automobile has a drain valve installed > >>>to the fuel tank? > >>><snip> > > > > > > Most diesel tanks do. Most diesel engines also have water separators somewhere > > in the fuel system. There is a physical difference between gasoline and diesel > > fuel as to why. > > Actually, their isn't. Water doesn't mix with either. Your correct, water does not mix in either. Diesel does not evaporate like gasoline which is the physical difference I was referring, and the fuel systems are not required by law to have an closed evaporative system like gasoline tanks have. Because of this most if not all diesel tanks are exposed to large amounts of outside atmosphere which contains water which condenses in the tank. > > > Matt >
|
|
#166
October 30th 04, 07:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message ... > Thomas Moats wrote: > > > "Full_Name" > wrote in message > > ... > > > >>On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:00:03 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio > > wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Have you all observed that not one automobile has a drain valve installed > >>>to the fuel tank? > >>><snip> > > > > > > Most diesel tanks do. Most diesel engines also have water separators somewhere > > in the fuel system. There is a physical difference between gasoline and diesel > > fuel as to why. > > Actually, their isn't. Water doesn't mix with either. Your correct, water does not mix in either. Diesel does not evaporate like gasoline which is the physical difference I was referring, and the fuel systems are not required by law to have an closed evaporative system like gasoline tanks have. Because of this most if not all diesel tanks are exposed to large amounts of outside atmosphere which contains water which condenses in the tank. > > > Matt >
|
|
#168
October 30th 04, 08:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:00:03 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio > > wrote: > > ...I have seen several fires caused by half-wits spilling gasoline while > attempting to remove or drain a fuel tank - with or without intank > pump, and either lighting a torch to snip off a stubborn tank strap > bolt, or thoughlessly lighting up a smoke a few feet away. Or dropping > an incandescent trouble light, or spilling gas on one. > > Ive seen fires caused by gasoline vapour, spilling over the top of an > open pail of gasoline and settling in the open drain of the shop, > being ignited by a chance spark from either welding, cutting, > grinding, dropping a tool, a dropped match or cig butt, etc. > > I've seen fires caused by short circuits while working on a vehicle > electrical system without disconnecting the battery ground - and even > from some dim-wit trying to remove the battery power lead instead of > the ground, and shorting the power to ground, blowing up the battery. I had to go to a Ford Exporer assy. plant one time when we shipped bad fuel pump product that made it all the way into the assembly line. The Ford guy who was dropping the tanks and swapping out the bad pumps with the Explorers up on a lift was smoking a cigarette the whole time. Gasoline was all over the floor, and the old sender units, dripping with gasoline, were being stacked into cardboard boxes that quickly became totally saturated in fuel to the side of the lift. I was simultaneously shocked and amazed. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
|
#169
October 30th 04, 08:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... > > "Denny" > wrote in message > ... >> >> "Thomas Moats" > wrote in message >> ... >> > <snip> >> >> >If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ >> >> >> >> No,, about half an hour maximum will empty a 72 liter tank - and >> >> totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being >> >> drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount >> >> of restriction from the line. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ><snip> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > That is bull. >> > >> > >> Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working fuel >> pump. >> >> Denny >> >> > If your fuel pump is working why would you would you drain it that way? It > is > very time consuming. You will not pull 72 liters or 19 gallons in a half > hour. > Maybe if it's the sending unit that is not working?? Or maybe the tank itself that needs replaced?? I'm not always in a hurry to do a job. If it works out, sometimes I'll start draining the tank on one vehicle while I'm finishing up another job. It does cut into my bull**** time but I make more money. <G> Denny
|
|
#170
October 30th 04, 08:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... > > "Denny" > wrote in message > ... >> >> "Thomas Moats" > wrote in message >> ... >> > <snip> >> >> >If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ >> >> >> >> No,, about half an hour maximum will empty a 72 liter tank - and >> >> totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being >> >> drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount >> >> of restriction from the line. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ><snip> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > That is bull. >> > >> > >> Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working fuel >> pump. >> >> Denny >> >> > If your fuel pump is working why would you would you drain it that way? It > is > very time consuming. You will not pull 72 liters or 19 gallons in a half > hour. > Maybe if it's the sending unit that is not working?? Or maybe the tank itself that needs replaced?? I'm not always in a hurry to do a job. If it works out, sometimes I'll start draining the tank on one vehicle while I'm finishing up another job. It does cut into my bull**** time but I make more money. <G> Denny
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
