Re: The Fuel Vs Water in a tanker debate

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
41

jakethesnake:

the maoster:
^^^^ that’ll be 20000kg of water then :smiley:

Sorry, but it won’t. When the vehicle was loaded (max weight with spirit = 24t ) there was certainly room for a few more hundred litres or kgs if you like.
As I said it was full to the brim with water so the weight (normally 24t) would have been much higher.

Agreed Jake. :smiley:

I make it that you’re correct.

When you said ‘a 20,000L tank’, I understood you to mean that your tank normally carries 20,000ish L of Petrol/Kerosene/Diesel plus the required ullage* space, dependent on the exact product.

When you said that the tank had been filled to the brim with water, I guess that the reason was that some kind of hotwork (welding/cutting/grinding) needed to be undertaken for some reason.

Your tanker would (of course) feel much heavier to drive, even if you just had to shuffle it around in the yard.

=================

Trying to keep this as straightforward (and un-scientific) as I can… ADR says that there are several forms of Diesel, which can include some forms of central heating oil, but they all ship on the same UN number, so for the purposes of this discussion… they’re Diesel. :wink:

*Ullage can be thought of as the free space above the liquid in a tank which is a legal requirement, and allows for changes in temperature causing product expansion within the tank which may be encountered during the journey.

Degree of filling can be thought of as the % of the total capacity of the tank that is occupied by the liquid to be carried.
:bulb: Liquid being carried + ullage = 100%, so now the size of any given tank doesn’t matter.
Some people talk in terms of percentage fill, whilst others talk in terms of ullage, but even this doesn’t matter once folks remember that liquid being carried + ullage = 100%. That should take care of ‘volume.’ :smiley:

Overfill can be thought of as a situation when there has been ‘invasion’ of the required ullage space by allowing too much liquid cargo into the tank. This may lead to overflow on a bad day.
:bulb: It does NOT automatically follow that overfill = overflow, it’s just that it might.

Malc made the point about specific gravity (SG) which can be thought of as the actual weight, which obviously has implications for axle/gross weights for both drivers and vehicle owners.

The SG figure multiplied by the number of litres to be loaded gives an indication of the weight of the load.

SG is usually based on the weight of water, so water = 1.
Some substances are lighter than water, so their SG figure will be 0.■■■ (A figure less than 1)
Some substances are heavier than water, so their SG figure will be 1.■■■ (A figure more than 1)

42

eagerbeaver:

m.a.n rules:
good info mate , was you top or bottom loading then…?

I think Dipper mentioned doing some bottom loading recently.

I’m cautiously awaiting a mention of “rail grinding” from Dipper in Johnny’s topic. :open_mouth:

43

dieseldave:

jakethesnake:

the maoster:
^^^^ that’ll be 20000kg of water then :smiley:

Sorry, but it won’t. When the vehicle was loaded (max weight with spirit = 24t ) there was certainly room for a few more hundred litres or kgs if you like.
As I said it was full to the brim with water so the weight (normally 24t) would have been much higher.

Agreed Jake. :smiley:

I make it that you’re correct.

When you said ‘a 20,000L tank’, I understood you to mean that your tank normally carries 20,000ish L of Petrol/Kerosene/Diesel plus the required ullage* space, dependent on the exact product.

When you said that the tank had been filled to the brim with water, I guess that the reason was that some kind of hotwork (welding/cutting/grinding) needed to be undertaken for some reason.

Your tanker would (of course) feel much heavier to drive, even if you just had to shuffle it around in the yard.

=================

Trying to keep this as straightforward (and un-scientific) as I can… ADR says that there are several forms of Diesel, which can include some forms of central heating oil, but they all ship on the same UN number, so for the purposes of this discussion… they’re Diesel. :wink:

*Ullage can be thought of as the free space above the liquid in a tank which is a legal requirement, and allows for changes in temperature causing product expansion within the tank which may be encountered during the journey.

Degree of filling can be thought of as the % of the total capacity of the tank that is occupied by the liquid to be carried.
:bulb: Liquid being carried + ullage = 100%, so now the size of any given tank doesn’t matter.
Some people talk in terms of percentage fill, whilst others talk in terms of ullage, but even this doesn’t matter once folks remember that liquid being carried + ullage = 100%. That should take care of ‘volume.’ :smiley:

Overfill can be thought of as a situation when there has been ‘invasion’ of the required ullage space by allowing too much liquid cargo into the tank. This may lead to overflow on a bad day.
:bulb: It does NOT automatically follow that overfill = overflow, it’s just that it might.

Malc made the point about specific gravity (SG) which can be thought of as the actual weight, which obviously has implications for axle/gross weights for both drivers and vehicle owners.

The SG figure multiplied by the number of litres to be loaded gives an indication of the weight of the load.

SG is usually based on the weight of water, so water = 1.
Some substances are lighter than water, so their SG figure will be 0.■■■ (A figure less than 1)
Some substances are heavier than water, so their SG figure will be 1.■■■ (A figure more than 1)

Thank you dieseldave, on that particular vehicle it carried 18200 diesel and as I said 20000 spirit. I reckon full to the brim was at least 18800 if not a little more. I thought I had explained myself well enough and I was surprised by the member who disputed me.
Maybe he was having a bad day or something.

44

Keep it going man rules and star down under. It was very interesting. I have done top and bottom loading and hope to hear more soon. :laughing:

45

Dave, am I correct in assuming that ADR is the equivalent of our Dangerous Goods (DG) licence?

46

m.a.n rules:

jakethesnake:

m.a.n rules:
all due respect jts but the stories dad has told me when it comes to the f word nothing would shock me. but them days have gone… it wasn’t till I got older and wiser that I understood how we all had new bikes etc in a then poor neighbourhood …

Yep things have changed for sure. I’ll bet your Dad had a nice motor too. :laughing:

strange you should say that jake but yep he did, in the 6 0’s it was a blue two tone Vauxhall cresta and then a couple of jags and my favourite in the 70’s was the zodiac exec 3 litre…
ffs he’s now 85 and got a auto corsa. he does let me down… god bless him… :unamused: :laughing:

No fiddle on a pension, god bless him.

47

Star down under.:
Dave, am I correct in assuming that ADR is the equivalent of our Dangerous Goods (DG) licence?

yep, it’s a European agreement on the movement of dangerous goods/loads…

48

There are three things to remember about loading liquids.

Specific Gravity. It is easier to put more on, then take it off. :stuck_out_tongue:

Ullage. it comes up faster than you think & before you can get from the dipstick to the stop button/valve. (See Above) :angry:

ABV. This affects drivers when it is an urgent load, the higher the ABV, the more phone calls you will receive in the morning. :laughing:

49

Just as well you didn’t put 20,000 litres of antifreeze in it then. :smiley:

50

Star down under.:
Dave, am I correct in assuming that ADR is the equivalent of our Dangerous Goods (DG) licence?

Hi Star down under,

I used the term ADR to mean the set of Regs that governs the transport of dangerous goods by road, so I was saying that the Regs say XXXXXXX etc.

Drivers’ slang also uses the same term (ADR) to mean the equivalent of your DG licence.

Presently, ADR can be thought of a ‘club’ that members (countries) join for the purpose of standardising international transport in terms of using the same set of internationally agreed rules, which gets around the fact that the (currently) 51 member countries use many different languages and several different alphabets.

Over here in the UK, the business of moving dangerous goods domestically by Road is also governed by UK CDG Regs, which give ADR force of law in the UK, except for the bits of ADR that HM The Queen doesn’t like.
(That’s just my way of explaining it, but that is how it works. :smiley:)

Our own UK parliament passed the UK CDG Regs (to be altered again in due course) which tell us what we must do for UK domestic journeys instead of the bits of ADR that HM The Queen didn’t like.

A very good example of one of the differences is our UK dangerous goods tanker signage system, which is very different to how the other 50 ADR countries do it.

Dave’s ADR trivia:
The full title of the ADR books will change for the next issue in 2021.

51

jakethesnake:
Thank you dieseldave, on that particular vehicle it carried 18200 diesel and as I said 20000 spirit. I reckon full to the brim was at least 18800 if not a little more. I thought I had explained myself well enough and I was surprised by the member who disputed me.
Maybe he was having a bad day or something.

Oh we’re still playing that game are we?

You said originally that your tanker carried 2000ltrs, full stop, no mention of diesel, gold dust or even fairy dust. You then got all twisted out of shape about a tongue in cheek remark. I imagine that you wouldn’t understand tongue in cheek or even any form of humour so I was prepared to let your tediousness slide, I mean let’s face it you have previous with making grand statements that you repeatedly fail to back up and instead employ your usual trick of muddying the waters or simply denying you said it.

Please, please carry on , obviously it won’t be amusing to you (an alien concept) but by hell you are making me laugh.

52

m.a.n rules:

Star down under.:
Dave, am I correct in assuming that ADR is the equivalent of our Dangerous Goods (DG) licence?

yep, it’s a European agreement on the movement of dangerous goods/loads…

Hi m.a.n rules,

The issuing body (UNECE) for ADR has decided that they’re altering the title of the Agreement, and consequently the title of the ADR books of Regs.

Presently, and for the whole of my 16ish years as a DGSA, the ADR books have been called:

“European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road”

However, there has been a meeting of those who decide such things… they decided to re-title the Agreement (ADR) and just leave off the word “European” altogether.

My own comment on this is that it better fits the geographic spread of the Agreement due to the relatively ‘new’ members such as Morocco, Tunisia and Nigeria.
(There are a few other non-European member countries as well.)

The source is here:

The important part is Article 1… and we even get to keep the familiar initials ADR. :smiley:

ARTICLE 1
Amendment to the title of the Agreement
The title of the Agreement shall be amended to read “Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road”. The acronym “ADR” remains unchanged.

53

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

thanks for that dave, interesting…

54

When it comes to water, 1l=1kg, so 1000l=1metric ton. This is because it’s specific gravity is 1 for the temperature range that you would carry it by road.

Any hydrocarbon, spirit etc, has an SG of less than 1, meaning it’s less dense so weighs less. This is why crude oil floats on sea water.

Not all liquids are the same though. The heaviest I ever carried was some stuff called mono ethylene glycol, can’t remember the SG off the top of my head but it was a sod to carry as a fully weighted road barrel had so much ullage space that it slapped about something terrible.

55

WhiteTruckMan:
When it comes to water, 1l=1kg, so 1000l=1metric ton. This is because it’s specific gravity is 1 for the temperature range that you would carry it by road.

Any hydrocarbon, spirit etc, has an SG of less than 1, meaning it’s less dense so weighs less. This is why crude oil floats on sea water.

Not all liquids are the same though. The heaviest I ever carried was some stuff called mono ethylene glycol, can’t remember the SG off the top of my head but it was a sod to carry as a fully weighted road barrel had so much ullage space that it slapped about something terrible.

You have the far end of the scale with hydrocarbons & single carbons like gases, (Ethane) then at the other end is Bromine, Sulphuric acid and Trichloroethylene. (Bullet Tanks)

Your analogy of floating oil on water compares with mine of a B52, Zombie Brain Haemorrhage or an Irish Car Bomb :stuck_out_tongue:

56

dieseldave:

eagerbeaver:

m.a.n rules:
good info mate , was you top or bottom loading then…?

I think Dipper mentioned doing some bottom loading recently.

I’m cautiously awaiting a mention of “rail grinding” from Dipper in Johnny’s topic. :open_mouth:

Laugh.png

57

the maoster:

jakethesnake:
Thank you dieseldave, on that particular vehicle it carried 18200 diesel and as I said 20000 spirit. I reckon full to the brim was at least 18800 if not a little more. I thought I had explained myself well enough and I was surprised by the member who disputed me.
Maybe he was having a bad day or something.

Oh we’re still playing that game are we?

You said originally that your tanker carried 2000ltrs, full stop, no mention of diesel, gold dust or even fairy dust. You then got all twisted out of shape about a tongue in cheek remark. I imagine that you wouldn’t understand tongue in cheek or even any form of humour so I was prepared to let your tediousness slide, I mean let’s face it you have previous with making grand statements that you repeatedly fail to back up and instead employ your usual trick of muddying the waters or simply denying you said it.

Please, please carry on , obviously it won’t be amusing to you (an alien concept) but by hell you are making me laugh.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
excellent accurate posting there my good man.
im wondering what the next move will be.
denying,muddying,or possibly ignoring might be the way to go seeing as thats how its been working with the " these are the alternatives to logistical problms without using lorrys" that were apparently more than obvious to everyone until he got called out to name them…hence we are still waiting patiently for the answer.

apart from the weight,then is a litre of spirits the same volume as a litre of water? any legitimate tanker gurus out there??

58

yep, its the space it takes up, its like a ton of feathers and a ton of coal, no different…

59

dieseldog999:
apart from the weight,then is a litre of spirits the same volume as a litre of water?

Yes, the volume is a litre in both cases, so they take up the same amount of space.
The only proviso I’d add is temperature. If there’s a temperature rise/fall, then the two liquids you mentioned may expand/contract to occupy more/less space.

However, if the weight is considered, then the weight of a litre of each of the substances you mentioned will be somewhat different.

Tankering (especially with liquid dangerous goods) can sometimes be quite tricky because both weight and volume must be considered.

60

WhiteTruckMan:
The heaviest I ever carried was some stuff called mono ethylene glycol.

CAV511 mentioned Anti freeze earlier, is mono ethylene glycol the key ingredient in anti freeze.