Budget friendly diesel tank for those who don't get on well with fibreglass.

[zeehag]

my current fail tank has a beautifully added inspection port--is trans parent so i can see fuel inside tank .
as my tank is a pos and sucks canal water instead of fuel--gawds know where the hell that canal water is coming from--it makes its own-- i am in process of design and build of new tankage, intrinsic to boat.

originally my boat came with 2 stainless water tanks and 1 large stainless fuel tank. when the original welds on fuel tank leaked, the owner at the time replaced the tank with a plastic pick up truck tank which is a major no no as they donot work adequately and hold nearly nothing--44 gal in a heavy displacement cruiser is nothing.
my original thought was new ss tankage. oops price fail... ha ha ha ha
so i was planning on making intrinsic fg tanks.
i am thinking this panel idea could be used in my planning--- seems a reasonable method of preventing the need to escape my own home while these tanks are fabricated and installed....
now for my other thought--i was taught by a yacht manufacturer about the use of heavy cardboard as a core for fg works.. as it is flexible and takes on the characteristics of the compound absorbed into it, i think this flexibility will make my tanks a bit better for my boat-- can make the curves more satisfactorily than can wood, and takes up less space.
add 2 beautiful clear inspection ports such as mine already has and baffles and i will be on the seas again. and i can even assist as i will theoretically not be overwhelmed by fumes.
thankyou for the idea and possibility of effecting this repair as i wait for other repairs...
as for having original stampings in everything-- formosa boat builders did not do that. i have not seen any such stampage on any parts in my ericson or other boats i have owned over time. none of my tanks in any boats i ever owned had any markings as to origin. to say that these manufactured tanks does not fit standards because of the lack of markings is abjectly ridiculous.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Capn Jimbo

Pardon my ignorance but couldn't you have used some thin marine ply, then glassed both sides? And wouldn't that have adhered better for a nice strong cored tank?

You are quite right, plywood is one of the most common construction methods, and is the method described in the West System document. I almost went down that path but it looked like a LOT more work, and given my discomfort with working with fibreglass it was enough to stop me.

The whole point about this construction is that it was very fast and easy. I only needed to glass the inside of the tank, and the way I have constructed it the bonding with the panels is practically irrelevant. I had to get a little clever to put the top on, but even there I found what I think was a very strong connection by tapering the edge of the final panel and building up a thick edge around the taper. (Luckily I did put lots of CSM in that part, given the warning about unreinforced resin.)

[GILow]

Originally Posted by zeehag

my current fail tank has a beautifully added inspection port--is trans parent so i can see fuel inside tank .

I like this idea, I have a lot of very strong Perspex and other materials lying around, I shall check to see if they are ok with diesel.

Originally Posted by zeehag

now for my other thought--i was taught by a yacht manufacturer about the use of heavy cardboard as a core for fg works.. as it is flexible and takes on the characteristics of the compound absorbed into it, i think this flexibility will make my tanks a bit better for my boat-- can make the curves more satisfactorily than can wood, and takes up less space.

Very interesting idea, and I can imagine the resin soaking into it well.

Originally Posted by zeehag

as for having original stampings in everything-- formosa boat builders did not do that. i have not seen any such stampage on any parts in my ericson or other boats i have owned over time. none of my tanks in any boats i ever owned had any markings as to origin. to say that these manufactured tanks does not fit standards because of the lack of markings is abjectly ridiculous.

I think this is as much a cultural indicator as anything else. Australia used to have a pleasantly "go for it" attitude to this sort of stuff, and I always felt the US was terribly uptight and over regulated, but as time goes on Australia is also becoming just as much of a PITA. Anyway, it does tend to create a sort of knee-jerk reaction of "you're all gonna die!" any time someone does something a bit out of the box. In fairness, I would never have considered this construction if I was dealing with petrol, which scares me silly, but the only scary thing about diesel, to me, is the smell if I get this wrong.

I do hope this method helps someone as it has helped me.

Matt

[GILow]

Well, I found this on the web, seems to indicate a Perspex inspection port is a good option. The report says hazing after one year, which I would assume is constant exposure. Given I would not expect anything like constant exposure it seems a good way to go.

http://www.mitchellgroup.com.au/tech...a8fcf66a049360

Thanks for the great idea Zeehag!

[rognvald]

Another example of an intelligent, resourceful sailor who looks for alternatives before breaking out the checkbook. Nice job, Gilow! Good luck and safe sailing, Rognvald

[Sea Life]

Hey guys, not trying to piss on anyones parade, just informing the readers. Too many times I hear "I've never had a problem", or "thats how everyone does it". Does not make it legal. Most people get away with it most of the time. But if there is an accident investigation, it is not going to be pleasant, for the surveyor who let it slide or the person responsible for the violation. The insurance company will come to collect what they paid out. FYI fuel spill liability is a big one. Anyway for those interested:

§ 183.514 Fuel tanks: Labels.
(a) Each fuel tank must have a label that meets the requirements of paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.

(b) Each label required by paragraph (a) of this section must contain the following information:

(1) Fuel tank manufacturer's name (or logo) and address.

(2) Month (or lot number) and year of manufacture.

(3) Capacity in U.S. gallons.

(4) Material of construction.

(5) The pressure the tank is designed to withstand without leaking.

(6) Model number, if applicable.

(7) The statement, “This tank has been tested under 33 CFR 183.510(a).”

(8) If the tank is tested under § 183.584 at less than 25g vertical accelerations the statement, “Must be installed aft of the boat's half length.”

(c) Each letter and each number on a label must:

(1) Be at least 1/16 inch high and

(2) Contrast with the basic color of the label or be embossed on the label.

(d) Each label must:

(1) Withstand the combined effects of exposure to water, oil, salt spray, direct sunlight, heat, cold, and wear expected in normal operation of the boat, without loss of legibility; and

(2) Resist efforts to remove or alter the information on the label without leaving some obvious sign of such efforts.

[GILow]

Ha ha!

It is things like these that make me glad I live in Australia.

Mind you, the shopping in the USA is much better. :^)


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[zeehag]

Originally Posted by Sea Life

Hey guys, not trying to piss on anyones parade, just informing the readers. Too many times I hear "I've never had a problem", or "thats how everyone does it". Does not make it legal. Most people get away with it most of the time. But if there is an accident investigation, it is not going to be pleasant, for the surveyor who let it slide or the person responsible for the violation. The insurance company will come to collect what they paid out. FYI fuel spill liability is a big one. Anyway for those interested:

§ 183.514 Fuel tanks: Labels.
(a) Each fuel tank must have a label that meets the requirements of paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.

(b) Each label required by paragraph (a) of this section must contain the following information:

(1) Fuel tank manufacturer's name (or logo) and address.

(2) Month (or lot number) and year of manufacture.

(3) Capacity in U.S. gallons.

(4) Material of construction.

(5) The pressure the tank is designed to withstand without leaking.

(6) Model number, if applicable.

(7) The statement, “This tank has been tested under 33 CFR 183.510(a).”

(8) If the tank is tested under § 183.584 at less than 25g vertical accelerations the statement, “Must be installed aft of the boat's half length.”

(c) Each letter and each number on a label must:

(1) Be at least 1/16 inch high and

(2) Contrast with the basic color of the label or be embossed on the label.

(d) Each label must:

(1) Withstand the combined effects of exposure to water, oil, salt spray, direct sunlight, heat, cold, and wear expected in normal operation of the boat, without loss of legibility; and

(2) Resist efforts to remove or alter the information on the label without leaving some obvious sign of such efforts.

ok ~~ there is no one inspecting fuel tanks when you are stopped mid-passage and under suspicion of holding tank fail... the inspections i have observed for chartering and cargo are much different from those for cruisers.
for cruisers they search for holding tank, toilet compliance and safety gear, drugs and weapons and human trafficking. same cargo vessels.
i have yet to see a cruiser be jacked up for a diesel fuel tank.
as my current tank has none of the listed info written on it anywhere, much less permanently marked, i think i will be just fine with my carefully crafted tankage.
no one stamped into my original 40 yr old stainless steel tanks any of that bs~~ nothing.
the replacement tank in my formosa is a pickup truck tank without any kind of manufacturing info whatsoever. molded plastic pos.
perhaps the regulations you spout are for captains carrying passengers and performing charter work. they(uscg) donot care about this bs unless you carry passengers and charter your boat. then there are rules that MUST be followed. and even then, they did not inspected the fuel tankage..
fuel tank compliance--ha ha ha they too busy seeking out the toilet noncompliants.
never have i ever seen inspections of private non charter non cargo sailing boats wherein the uscg is concerned about fuel tankage.
i donot carry passengers nor charter.
even my friends with their cargo schooner who have been blessed with uscg random inspections of a cargo vessel have not had fuel tankage inspected.
come to think about that--they were not inspected that thoroughly when venturing in to san diego harbor with 5 tons of nicaruaguan coffee green beans to sell in usa. . they had 1 pfd too few--they were fined 25000 usd. not even looked at the real issues.
and so--- when you construct a charter or cargo vessel, make sure you are compliant with the all the nit picking regulations. have your pfds. they will not check your fuel tank compliance, only your black water compliance.
have a fun tank building day.
perhaps those regulations are for importation of a new boat off the production line???? mine never had those stamps or imprints.never. stainless tanks plain and fine. but then mine is not a production boat with production parts.
not even the partially modified pick up truck tank that was substituted for the original stainless tank has this mess written on it.
so, who is special ordering from what manufacturer a tank with specifications--i have yet to meet any boat i have inspected with these imprinted words anywhere on the visible surface of a fuel tank.
by the way, when you are stuck in bfe, with holed tank from whatever reason-- weld fail. fitting fail, you are going to go out and find one of these specially stamped and imprinted tanks --out in bfe, where nothing is prefabbed, and use that or are you going to just stop moving and die waiting for that special tank to appear in jungleland nowhereville, planet earth?
enjoy your wait.

donot forget to bring your rule book with you so you can remind the inspection team in your own boat of what they need to inspect.

and i thank the gods i am smart enough to not import a boat into usa.

i believe no one cruising is stoopit enough to create a fail tank.

[Sea Life]

Calm down zeehag, not a personal attack. CFR 33 stated IS for recreational boats, CFR 46 is for inspected boats. I am not talking about a USCG boarding. I am talking about a post insurance claim accident investigation or claim adjustment inspection. So yes still legally required. I see tags all the time, my first boat a 1982 Mainship had them. Most reputable tank fabricators do have tags. Having a tank fabricated is not just finding "a guy that knows how to weld", sorry not that simple.

GILow, sorry for the thread creep as it doesn't even apply to you! We all ignore laws all of the time, most are oblivious to the consequences though.

Are you guys starting to see why insurance companies have blanket rules for not insuring older boats? Perhaps because there owners do not care much for the standards....

[zeehag]

Originally Posted by Sea Life

Calm down zeehag, not a personal attack. CFR 33 stated IS for recreational boats, CFR 46 is for inspected boats. I am not talking about a USCG boarding. I am talking about a post insurance claim accident investigation or claim adjustment inspection. So yes still legally required. I see tags all the time, my first boat a 1982 Mainship had them. Most reputable tank fabricators do have tags. Having a tank fabricated is not just finding "a guy that knows how to weld", sorry not that simple.

GILow, sorry for the thread creep as it doesn't even apply to you! We all ignore laws all of the time, most are oblivious to the consequences though.

Are you guys starting to see why insurance companies have blanket rules for not insuring older boats? Perhaps because there owners do not care much for the standards....

considering that insurance is not an option for boats over xx years of age, then most of this is balderdash.
those with warrantees on their probably underinsured production boats can do these insurance guidelines and regulations. those of us who care more about our boats will pay more attention to the realities of use of boat.
insurance isnot a necessary evil--it is an evil. i carry liability only because it is recommended for cruising to avoid issues with scams involving locals hitting boats to confiscate them, and from damaging marinas in a storm.
even insured older boats will be hard pressed to produce these imprinted orders.ha ha ha ha
as boats built before the arbitrary regulation was written do not have these bits of new legislation do not cover older boats built before 1990. boats built before then have no writing on their tanks.
have you stopped to think that insurance legislation only benefits the insurance companies, not the purchasor???? think about it. older boats are not uninsurable due to individual modifications but because these regulations were not in practice when the boats were built and insurance scam wants to be sure they donot have to pay out for anything. does money for nothing ring a bell?? that defines insurance--money fro nothing--they get money you get nothing. you pay thru nose for something that MIGHT occur. wasteful society is disposable items only. buy it insure it toss it away when it breaks. omy. such responsibility. not.
and look at the damages inflicted by storms with names that go directly into the alleged safe zones marked out arbitrarily by insurance scampanies. i bet those premiums rise extravagantly before years end. oh btw--you are not allowed to p ut your boat there , in that SAFE place, as latitudes are wrong for coverage,ha ha h aha ha ha ha

[sailcrazy]

Your prior suggestion to use Permatex to seal my weeping tank fittings (between my close-link polycarbonate tank and metal fittings),post #15, prompted me to contact Permatex directly with the question. Their reply.... "dealing with polycarbonate we do not recommend our standard thread sealants. Instead, we suggest our Form-A-Gasket #2, #80016". I pass the info along, FWIW.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by sailcrazy

Your prior suggestion to use Permatex to seal my weeping tank fittings (between my close-link polycarbonate tank and metal fittings),post #15, prompted me to contact Permatex directly with the question. Their reply.... "dealing with polycarbonate we do not recommend our standard thread sealants. Instead, we suggest our Form-A-Gasket #2, #80016". I pass the info along, FWIW.

Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[GILow]

OK, a quick follow up for those who've read this far.

Tank is finished (a bit of weather and an interstate trip put the job on hold for a few weeks).

I have incorporated Zee's excellent transparent inspection hatch idea, though sadly the only bit of Perspex I could find in the shed was quite scruffy. If I find the good piece that I know is there somewhere it will be a simple enough job to cut a new clearer inspection hatch. Actually, a spare on board might be a good idea.

Anyway, all went well using epoxy to attach the various brass fittings. A piece of 3mm rubber sheet made a good inspection hatch gasket. Epoxied the inspection hatch bolts so they won't spin when tightening the hatch too.

I thought I would share the logic of the fitting placement in case it helps anyone else, and also so if I have missed something in my logic someone can tell me BEFORE I fit and fill the tank.

After a bit of thought, I put the pickup and the air breather along the centre line of the tank, on the logic that motor sailing might cause too much heel for the pickup to work on one tack if the fuel level is low, and that there was less chance of flooding the breather when the tank is close to full.

I put the return from the injectors beside the main cockpit filler fitting and the transfer fill point on the logic that they are not affected by tank angle, and having all the fillers together made their function clearer. Oh, and the access to the tank is easiest on the port side so maintenance is simpler too. The cockpit filler point location is dictated by my desire to be able to use a dipstick to test fuel levels from the cockpit/companionway, so I wanted the pipe to be a straight drop to the tank, which it will be at around a foot or more, plus the depth of the tank.

I hope this all helps someone... Final budget was AU$90 for the tank itself, AU$40 for the various brass and Acetal skin fittings, AU$14 for the rubber for the gasket (and there's enough to make another 10 gaskets), AU$7 for the inspection cover bolts (316 stainless M6) and AU$10 for a small double syringe of epoxy. Paint colour was dictated by what I had left in a tin from some other job, the Perspex was picked up from a rubbish pile at the office and the pickup tube was a bit of aluminium tube I had hanging around in the shed from a school project.

Total AU$161 for a 63 litre day tank which makes it pretty budget friendly in my books.

[GILow]

Another follow up.


This weekend saw a proper test of the tank, as I found myself motoring for 6 hours in calm conditions one day, then motor sailing for about 3 hours the next day.


All in all the tank was a huge success, no leaks apparent, no smell of fuel, and the inspection hatch proved to be a more convenient method of checking the fuel level than I had anticipated.


If I had more options on the design of the tank than those I was presented with (a fixed space of know dimensions) I would prefer to build something deeper and narrower to improve motor sailing performance. As it was, I started to pickup small amounts of air once the tank had less than 10 litres left, when the boat was on an angle of maybe 10 degrees heel. The centre pickup works well, but at the end of the day it is a large flat surface that the fuel has to cover, and once you combine a bit of heel with a bit of wave action, air bubbles become inevitable. Thankfully our engine has a very forgiving fuel system and it chugged on with only a slightly perceptible misfire from time to time. I emptied one of the spare 20 litre jerry cans in the tank and the problem went away.


Early days, but no regrets so far.


Matt

[ghendoaus]

Matt a well in the bottom into which the pickup would sit would be one way of avoiding the issue it wouldn't need to be very large or deep just enough to allow for the sloshing of the fuel. one down side is that the water and sediment would also collect there... but with a good polishing system and good filters you should negate most of the downsides.