Fuel Tanks

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:26 pm

Thanks Rachel, I did see that project and that put the idea in my head so that when I actually pulled my tank and could see how it would sit I was tempted. If I didn't have the deep bilge area I would definitely pursue the idea further.

And thanks to you Nathan, you woke me up from my daydream. The tank in the galley area would be an improvement but I think now it is not the best I can do. When you, Tim, and anyone else cruising in Maine this summer, come over to check out the boat I know I will never hear the end of any half-baked installations. It has to be good and right or ripped outa there. Hence the empty interior at the moment...

I am going to get back on that custom tank early next week.

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:53 pm

Keep us posted on the deep-bilge-tank! I'm very excited for this!

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:52 pm

Yeah, well I would be much happier to let someone else make the mistakes so I could learn from them but I guess it is my turn in the fire...

So, ... routing the fuel filler hose. Does anyone foresee a problem with running the filler hose from the original Triton fitting down passed the propeller shaft (maybe half inch to an inch clearance here) and then under the engine to the tank? Assuming the hose could be secured enough would this be safe? Could a catastrophe with the shaft and attaching parts cause a rupture in the filler hose thus leading to an even bigger catastrophe? I already have a bilge pump hose on one side of the shaft and it seems to have lived there quite happily for some time. A stainless steel shield over the vulnerable section of hose? An alternative would be to route the hose in the groove between the hull and engine beds. It wouldn't be as clean and neat looking though. And I hate routing fuel alongside an engine; chafe is a problem and a major engine failure could make things much worse - a throwback to my turbine engine days where turbine wheels could detonate and sever all sorts of flammable fluid lines. Then again I have seen piston rods punch holes clean out of crankcases but this has very little to do with fuel tanks...

Maybe the best alternative is to route the filler hose from a different point on the deck and bring the hose down somewhere in the saloon/galley area. I don't want to redesign the boat though. Or maybe I do...

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:58 pm

One problem with Tritons is that there is not clear passage through the settee lockers to the bilge area; the cabin sole blocks that. Therefore, for a clean, invisible fuel fill hose run, you are forced to run it from the after end as you suggest. You could bring it down and then into the bilge through the old galley area, but anywhere forward of the engine room the hose would end up above the cabin sole with no clear path to the bilge.

When running the fuel fill hose (and also the vent hose) through the engine room, take pains to not only secure the hoses well against movement and vibration, but to also keep the fill line self-draining; that is, avoid any humps or upward turns.

For both fill and vent lines in the engine room, you must use type A1 or A2 hose. If they're secured well, and properly maintained, you can successfully run these hoses in this manner.

I would try and keep the hoses as far away from the shaft as possible. All you need is one securing clamp to fail, and that hose could be chewed to bits in short order against a rotating shaft--not a fun situation with gasoline. A more direct route from your current deck fill plate would probably bring the hose alongside the engine, outside the foundation, and then into the bilge where your tank is to be located. This has the added benefit, I think, of keeping that constant draining angle in the hose through its entire run.

Running the hose along the shaft and under the engine, to my way of thinking, might cause the tank end of the hose to be higher than the point somewhere in the engine room; perhaps not, too. I'm just guessing based on my recollection of the original engine compartment setup.

Anyway, those are my initial thoughts.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:39 am

<rant>Why on earth would you have an online form to request a quote if you weren't going to respond to it???</rant>

BTW, Atlantic Coastal Welding (www.speedytanks.com) returned a quote of $320 in less than 24 hours and the request was place Friday night. It was a pretty generic quote but "speedy" and they advertise 5 day turn-around. I still need to call them with particulars.

-Britton

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:45 am

This morning I woke up and thought that I would never be comfortable with the hose next to the shaft - and I never even thought about it getting below the fill point on the tank - good point. So now it looks like I will lay it alongside the engine beds. It won't look as pretty but I think I will re-route a bilge pump hose along the other side of the engine beds to at least give it a "balanced" look. Maybe even use a similar looking hose to really set the ambience...

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:51 am

You could get really kitschy and spray paint one hose red and one green...on the appropriate sides, of course.

Just kidding, obviously.

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 8:00 pm

One monkeywrench after another.....

Is it crazy that I'm worried about the engine radiating heat onto that hose?
Starboard side is certainly better than portside in this regard, but still... its kinda iffy dontcha think?

Perhaps it may be better to abandon the existing fill location and relocate it farther forward? So that the hose comes down through/behind the galley module, and down into the bilge via the companionway step/batterybox area? Shorter hose run, very little low-slope run, and not so much conflict with the engine, I'd think.

Post by **dasein668** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:51 pm

Where exactly are you planning to put that tank, Britton? I had been planning to run the fuel fill along the side of the hull down in behind/into the galley module, and then down into the bilge forward of the engine. Maybe, though, that won't work when I actuall get down to brass tacks. I didn't investigate that very thoroughly since I never got around to even ordering a tank...

As far as the heat of the engine, I wouldn't think that would cause any problems. I mean, it doesn't cause any issues with the actual fuel delivery line, right?

Post by **dasein668** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:53 pm

Yeah, what Mike said. Geez, if I had actually read Figment's post rather than just looking at the words....

What Mike describes re: running the line is exactly what I had in mind. That said, I was planning to still use the existing fill location and run the line forward, at a slope, along the hull, then down as Mike wrote.

Phew. Too much paint fumes recently, methinks.

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 11:10 pm

dasein668 wrote:Too much paint fumes recently, methinks.

Yeah, cuz sweating buckets while pushing a longboard all day does wonders for sharpening one's mind!

That brings up an interesting idea, though. To complement our "bottom sanding grunt" and "boat obsession medal candidate" subtitles, perhaps there should be some sort of mental-acuity (or lack thereof) indicator based on recent exposure to inhaled fumes and particles! That'd put a whole new filter on all of this information flying about, eh?

Post by **Tim** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 6:38 am

Figment wrote:Is it crazy that I'm worried about the engine radiating heat onto that hose?

In concept, no, you're not crazy. But the proper type of hose (Type A1 or A2) is designed to withstand that sort of residual heat easily and remain safe. This is why it's important to actually use the proper hose type, not just any old hose you find lying around. A1 and A2 hoses are constructed to meet stringent fire ratings.

Note also that the need for the hose to be "self-draining" also has basis in a safety need: that is, if the fuel all drains out of the fill hose and into the tank, the hose will not contain fuel throughout its length, so even with a hose in the engine room, it won't be full of gasoline.

Fuel lines and fuel fill hoses run through engine rooms on a regular basis, so this just isn't an issue when the system is installed correctly. This is definitely an instance where you want to observe the installation standards closely. Obviously the hose shouldn't come into contact directly with hot engine parts (and that wouldn't be the case here), but alongside the engine foundations, several inches away from any hot engine parts? Not a problem. Chafe from improper securing will end up being more of a problem.

The biggest advantage to relocating the fill further foward would be minimizing the fill hose run. One thing to consider is that most hoses come in a standard 12' package, so if your run is longer than that you need a splice. (You can get 50' packs, but I doubt you want that much, unless you want to make the fill hose like a krazy straw.) Part of the hose is likely to still run through the engine room at the forward end, as I don't know of any other invisible way to get the hose into the bilge otherwise.

Maybe a nice polished bronze or copper pipe running directly from the top of the tank to a deck fill in the overhead above? While this arrangement might seem to be in the way, the pole might just come in handy, Britton, when you cruise to Atlantic City.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 7:57 am

While this arrangement might seem to be in the way, the pole might just come in handy, Britton, when you cruise to Atlantic City

Umm... yeah.... When I am in the area I always try to stop in at Atlantic City and pick up new crew. I never had much luck but maybe the pole would help them feel at home... What are those poles used for again?... It has been a looooong time (which is probably a good thing).

So no fuel in the filler hose then... rats. I was hoping to increase my fuel tankage with a long hose. I was also hoping to use the original deck fitting just to make life easier too. The less I redesign the better. I do like the idea of moving the fitting forward and bringing the hose down through the galley though. One of the tank design problems I had was that I wanted to make the tank as tall as I can; right to the cabin sole if possible, which doesn't leave room for a filler neck on top of the tank. I was thinking of the filler neck on the rear face of the tank but it would then need a baffle in front of the inlet to keep the surge from sloshing back and forth from the tank top through several feet of filler hose. However, with the hose coming down through the galley, one could put in a ninety degree fitting just prior to entering the rear face of the tank which would block the surge.

My old Triton battery box at the foot of the companionway is becoming a "service point" (raw water and fuel filters, coolant overflow tank, maybe a permanent oil change pump, etc.) and routing a fuel filler hose through the area shouldn't be a problem.

One monkeywrench after another.....

That is why shifting the original tank forward is such an appealing idea...

I had been planning to run the fuel fill along the side of the hull down in behind/into the galley module, and then down into the bilge forward of the engine. Maybe, though, that won't work when I actuall get down to brass tacks. I didn't investigate that very thoroughly since I never got around to even ordering a tank...

That is today's project; the brass tacks. Hopefully I won't sit on too many...

You could get really kitschy and spray paint one hose red and one green...on the appropriate sides, of course. Just kidding, obviously.

Now you are talking... but what if I was cruising outside of U.S. or the other three-four countries that have their nav colors backwards? Would I have to repaint then? Oh, you are kidding... or are you?... As I am undecided on hull paint schemes, how about Claret to port and a Forest Green to starboard. That would get confusing with the whole "Red,Right,Return" thing...

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 8:17 am

Head...hurt...pain...ow.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 7:18 pm

Head...hurt...pain...ow

Hehe, I guess this subject has been pretty well ground into the dust. Must be getting close to a record for the longest thread though. I will send pictures of the finished product ... unless I just shift the orginal tank forward and then I will hide in shame.

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:50 pm

bcooke wrote:unless I just shift the orginal tank forward and then I will hide in shame.

Ahh, but we will know. After all, the first thing that I'm going to do when your boat arrives in Maine for cruising is stick my head down in the bilge to ooooh and ahhhh the nice tank.

Post by **Tim** » Tue Apr 19, 2005 6:42 am

The first thing I'm going to do is confirm that you actually put in the new tank! hehe

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Tue Apr 19, 2005 8:55 am

The first thing I'm going to do is confirm that you actually put in the new tank! hehe

After all, the first thing that I'm going to do when your boat arrives in Maine for cruising is stick my head down in the bilge to ooooh and ahhhh the nice tank.

I think I need to reschedule my launch date for a little later in the summer...

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Tue Apr 19, 2005 9:38 am

bcooke wrote:I think I need to reschedule my launch date for a little later in the summer...

Unacceptable!

Post by **Tim** » Tue Apr 19, 2005 11:09 am

Of course we're just giving you a hard time! It's just one of those fun things to do! hehe

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Tue Apr 19, 2005 7:34 pm

Oh sure, all in fun, just friends here, "Hehe"...

I have visions of arriving in Penobscot Bay after an all night sail (hand steering all the way of course as the windvane has to wait until I am certain of the waterline) and just as my new anchor slips over the side (hopefully well secured this time...) I will look up to see two shiny Tritons, one Flag blue, one Daaaark green, bearing down with boarding parties at the ready, the early morning sunlight glinting off magnifying glasses (mirrors/flashlights/etc.) freshly polished and ready for inspections.

Remember guys, go easy on me. This is only year one of a three year renovation. ;-)

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Tue Apr 19, 2005 10:21 pm

bcooke wrote:I will look up to see two shiny Tritons, one Flag blue, one Daaaark green, bearing down with boarding parties at the ready, the early morning sunlight glinting off magnifying glasses (mirrors/flashlights/etc.) freshly polished and ready for inspections.

Remember guys, go easy on me. This is only year one of a three year renovation. ;-)

Hey, no one is more critical of my boat than me. Everyone else thinks it's looking great, but I see all the flaws, errors, and issues. I'm sure it'll be the same with your boat.

Post by **Tim** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 6:35 am

Remember, I started with this. I just chose to do everything at once before attempting any use of the boat.

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:06 pm

I'm convinced that the do-it-all-at-once approach really does have a lot of merit. I'm seriously considering NOT launching Figment this summer, and just snowballing this deck project into a topsides painting project and an interior refit. If my summer turns out to be anything like my spring, I'm not going to have much time for sailing anyway.

I've advised every one of my residential clients: Do NOT move into that house until the renovation/construction is 100% complete. Moving in a month earlier at 95% completion is foolish because that last 5% will take three years to complete if you move in at 95%.
Only one has ever taken that advice. The rest have all come back to say they wished they'd listened.

Post by **Tim** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 4:01 pm

Figment wrote:I'm convinced that the do-it-all-at-once approach really does have a lot of merit.

Personally, I can't imagine doing it any other way. Perhaps that's because I have a set vision in mind for the boat when I start, and want that vision to be reality first; perhaps it's because I was fortunate enough (in Glissando's case) to have another boat in the water and sailing. I'd have a hard time eschewing sailing in favor of doing a project

The "one thing leads to another" syndrome is inevitable, and working around one finished area to complete some other job only extends the process. It also leads to the occasional re-do, as damage may occur to that previously-finished surface, etc. Having completed systems installed and then undertaking serious grinding and what have you can be a nightmare. And scope creep is inevitable as well; the more finished parts of the boat become, the less satisfactory some older components may appear.

Now, I also understand why people undertake "sailing restorations". There are cases where that makes sense; I'm just saying it would never work for me, particularly now that I've done it the all-at-once way in the past.

I guess it all depends on the scope of the project, but for anything major, it sure is nice just getting it done and then truly enjoying the boat thereafter.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 7:54 pm

Hey, no one is more critical of my boat than me. Everyone else thinks it's looking great, but I see all the flaws, errors, and issues. I'm sure it'll be the same with your boat.

I think it is all those years of finding fault with other people's work that is coming back to haunt me. I envision everyone else being as mean and critical as I am :-)

As for sailing projects...
I agree with Mike et. al. Planning a sailable restoration sells books but isn't too practical beyond a certain scope. Now working through a list of small projects while sailing is do-able but not when it involves serious re-design or structural/system overhaul. Then I agree it is better to get it over with.

I am with Mike. I might not launch this season...

Just kidding.

Actually, while I will definitely launch this season I have serious doubts about the following season. I need to launch the boat this year because I don't have a fixed idea of what I want or need. A summer's cruise will tell me a lot about the boat and which direction to take the rebuilding. I have too many idea/dreams/fantasies and not enough hard reality to balance them with.

As for the following season, I don't want to stop in midstream to get the boat back in the water plus, quite frankly, I can't afford to keep spending money at this rate and still have much time for the boat. Next year I am going to have to make real money which means I am not going to have time to sail the boat. A couple of years ago I had a boat on a mooring while I was working and saving for what turns out to be my current project (it wasn't planned at the time). I think I was able to go sailing about six times and overnighted twice. Putting the boat in the water for six day sails just isn't worth the effort for me. If I keep the boat out next year and save up some cash I can afford to take the following year off. As in off = no work and all play on the boat. I think it is a worthwhile trade. At least that is the story I will tell myself when I watch everyone else launch their boats next spring.

The good news for me at least is that I have found that I enjoy working on boats as an end in itself. Sailing and cruising is the best but working on boats is pretty satisfying too.

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:36 pm

bcooke wrote:A summer's cruise will tell me a lot about the boat and which direction to take the rebuilding. I have too many idea/dreams/fantasies and not enough hard reality to balance them with.

That understanding is a good one, as it would be easy to end up doing things you don't want/need if you don't have a basis from which to build on. I think its a really good idea for many people.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 10:55 am

Hmmm... what was this thread about again?...

Oh yeah, fuel tanks.

Nathan, I have some good news and bad news. The good news is that an 18-20 gallon tank in the deep bilge area can be built locally for $300-350. The bad news is that in order for me to get that kind of capacity I needed to put the fittings on the rear face of the tank. No problem... until you mention the word "gasoline". Once that word comes out everything changes. I would be curious as to what ABYC standards say (hint, hint, I can't afford to buy a set of standards but someone around here may have an old copy lying around...) but my visit to a well respected (and from all appearances well deserving of that respect) welding/tank fabrication shop taught me that there is a difference between diesel and gasoline tank standards.

Apparently the Coast Guard frowns heavily when fittings are placed anywhere other than the top of a gasoline tank. In order for me to get the 18-20 gallon capacity, the tank needs to come right up to the cabin sole (with an inch clearance) and put the inlet/outlet/drain/etc fittings on the aft end of the tank. If I have to put the fittings on top I need to lower the height of the tank by four inches or so which reduces the tank capacity to an anemic 12 gallons; hardly worth the effort in that case.

Diesel = no problem.
Gasoline = Big problem.

The shop said I could probably find another place to do the work but the Coast Guard would have a fit if they saw the installation. Plus, this shop has made thousands of tanks and if they wouldn't sign off on the design then there might be a good reason for it. I don't want a bilge full of gasoline after all.

I will probably go ahead and have a bilge tank made for potable water and use the "shift the original tank forward" idea. At least this summer you will see 'a' tank in the bilge even if it is not holding fuel.

Some days I really wish I was diesel powered.

I tried, please don't hold it against me :-)

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:37 am

bcooke wrote:I tried, please don't hold it against me :-)

Sorry man, but I just don't think we can be friends any more. hehe

Thanks for doing the legwork on this, even if it isn't going to work out for you. There's been some good discussion on the issue in this thread.

Post by **Tim** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 12:53 pm

bcooke wrote:I would be curious as to what ABYC standards say (hint, hint, I can't afford to buy a set of standards but someone around here may have an old copy lying around...)

Here is the applicable regulation. This is one of the instances where the ABYC standard (H-24.18.2.3) is actually repeated in the Code of Federal Regulations, making this a required standard, not merely recommended. This applies to gasoline tanks only.

33CFR 183.518 wrote:Each opening into the fuel tank must be at or above the topmost surface of the tank

Your welding shop is right on the ball. Good for them. It's nice to find vendors who care enough not to cut corners in order to make a buck. I'm sure Joe the Welder down the street would slap a tank together without thinking of any of the ramifications, but we all know better than to consider such nonsense.

I (and you too, I know) have seen some ridiculous lame-brained tank suggestions that decorum prevents me from repeating here. When dealing with gasoline, only the right way is the right way. (I find that pretty much applies to any system, construction, or installation, for that matter...)

Sorry to hear that this eliminates the practicable possibility of your putting a fuel tank in the bilge, but this thread has indeed been instructive to all nonetheless.

Post by **dasein668** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:54 pm

Ummm what does "at or above the topmost surface of the tank" mean? Above? If that means on the top surface, then it would follow that "at" means something different. Like on the side, but all the way at the top? Dunno. But that's some screwy language if it really means only ON THE TOP surface.

Post by **Tim** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 3:23 pm

As with all things legal, the CFR language leaves something to be desired, and is frequently ambiguous. Nonetheless, it's clear the spirit of the regulation is that attachments be above the tank so that a loose fitting or clamp would not allow gasoline to leak out of the tank by gravity alone. Any installation should satisfy that basic need, regardless of the wording.

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 7:01 pm

Are integrally welded fittings considered part of the "tank"?

That is to say... if there were welded pipe sections attached to the aft face of the tank which traversed and turned as necessary to fit the boat, but which were above the top surface of the tank when they were joined to hoses.... Does that count?

Purely an academic thought. Such a contraption could not possibly be economically viable.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:52 pm

Purely an academic thought. Such a contraption could not possibly be economically viable

Of course you still have the reason the regulation is there in the first place but I see where you are going. You don't mind if I jump off this bus though do you?

Your welding shop is right on the ball. Good for them.

Yeah, how unusual. I will definitely go back to them when I can.

Sorry to hear that this eliminates the practicable possibility of your putting a fuel tank in the bilge

Well, unless I make the tank longer to compensate for the lack of depth. That would mean filling the entire lower portion of the bilge which would eliminate any access and provide far too much habitat for the bilge monster. And then I would have a lot of surge and then... Back to the drawing boards on this one I think. While this plan didn't work out I did learn a lot about custom tank construction which will be useful in the future.

For the record my dimensions were
Side profile : 30 in length. Aft height = 22 in. Fwd height = 12 in.
Top profile : Length still 30 in. Aft width = 8 in. Fwd width = 10 in.
4050 cubic inches or 17.5 gallons.
Someone want to check my math? It took three tries to get the numbers right tonight. They agree with one of my quotes so I think I got it this time.

In my boat this gives one inch clearance on top and bottom and at least 3/4 inches (varies as the hull curves) clearance on each side.

With foam pads or wood strips glassed/epoxied in on the bottom and sides there would be about an inch to an inch and a half clearance from the cockpit sole. I was planning on an Inlet at the aft top end, vent was undecided as to rear or forward face or possibly a short 90 degree nipple on top, outlet about 2 inches from the aft bottom, drain plug below the outlet, two 90 degree fittings between the inlet and outlets so that a clear plastic tube could be used to connect them giving a positive visual indication of fluid level, one internal baffle (per one shop's recomendation), and two inspection plates - one on each side of the baffle. The inlet would turn 90 degrees shortly before entering the tank thereby eliminating the need for a baffle at the inlet (I thought the inflow velocity should be braked as it entered the tank and the surge along the top of the tank could slosh a ways up the inlet without a restriction) It would have been a thing of beauty. Now that I have it all planned out I am reluctant to let it go. It should work well with diesel fuel so maybe I will see my idea live in some other boat. Oh, the tank was going to be painted fire engine red to denote gasoline storage. If the tank is used for diesel then the designer gives permission to paint the tank yellow.

Sorry man, but I just don't think we can be friends any more. hehe

If my boat is boarded this summer an inspector might find Mt. Gay stored in the bilge. Or maybe a bilge beer cooler really would be a good idea...

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:03 am

bcooke wrote: If my boat is boarded this summer an inspector might find Mt. Gay stored in the bilge.

Ah, well, perhaps I was a bit hasty with that last post!

Post by **Tim** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:22 am

Figment wrote:Are integrally welded fittings considered part of the "tank"?

That is to say... if there were welded pipe sections attached to the aft face of the tank which traversed and turned as necessary to fit the boat, but which were above the top surface of the tank when they were joined to hoses.... Does that count?

This is why I tend to not quote chapter and verse and get overly stuck on the exact words of the regulations; the interpretations are up to someone else to decide. To me, something like a gas tank installation is either safe and sound, and meets the applicable regulations, or it doesn't. It's usually clear one way or another. I never research the fine points of any of this; it's just a waste of time. If I question a certain installation, I'll point it out, note it, and leave it at that.

Usually, all that is needed is some sound judgement and "common" sense.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:45 pm

A lot of us have probably read this but it seemed appropriate to post this message here to expand our "library" of information for future generations searching old posts.

The reason the fittings must be on the top of the tank is to
prevent a submerged fitting from leaking liquid into the boat
interior, which would then evaporate into fumes. The inside of a
submerged fitting is at a higher pressure than the outside, and
therefore more prone to leaking. A fitting above the liquid
surface has atmospheric pressure on both sides - except when it
gets splashed, of course - so there's no pressure difference
driving the gas through a pinhole leak. The requirement is NOT
that the fittings be on a horizontal rather than vertical surface.
The idea is that the fitting must not be submerged when the tank
is full and at rest. So a recessed area in the tank top would
require that the tank not be filled above the level of the
fitting. This is not a major concern with a Diesel tank, as
Diesel oil does not produce a flammable vapor at standard temp and
pressure.

-Britton

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:41 pm

So would you guys disown me if I put in a Tempo 12 gallon tank under the cockpit and slightly to port to clear the shifter as a temporary solution to my fuel problem? Or should I just clean my old tank and put it back in? Putting original parts back in my boat is such a novel idea...

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:27 pm

Do whatever it takes to go sailing this year!

Hey, I have a Tempo tank myself. It's not all bad.

Post by **dasein668** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 7:57 pm

Have you also discarded the idea of moving the existing tank forward into the galley? The monel tank isn't bad, and it's quite a bit bigger.

But, no, no disowning.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:38 pm

My ideas keep changing with the weather. I should just shut up until I have something in place. Deja vu moment... haven't I heard that before?..

I might use the old tank but it is just so DIRTY. It will take a lot of cleaning (without access holes) to make me feel comfortable with the tank. Maybe I should just have a custom tank made with a jog around the shifter. Maybe I should replace the shifter. Maybe I should... shut up and grind some more.

-Britton

Post by **dasein668** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:56 pm

I should think that if you take the tank out, you should be able to give it a pretty thorough cleaning just using the fuel fill neck and the tiny access plate (I'm assuming your tank looks like mine). No?

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:56 pm

Well, I don't have an access plate, tiny or otherwise. When I pulled the pickup tube it had grown approximately twice its diameter with a yellow fuzzy growth. The carburetor that I overhauled last week looked pretty ugly too.

On the other hand as you mentioned an access plate I just ran out into the garage to look at my tank and see if I missed something. I didn't. No access plate. But, I did take a harder look inside the tank. I didn't have a mirror and my flashlight was on the fritz (typical) but it did look better than I envisioned. I had flushed it out a couple of times before bringing it home. Maybe it won't look so bad in tomorrow's daylight.

I just keep looking for the "ideal" placement of the tank. I am beginning to think that the ideal doesn't exist and some compromise might be necessary. Maybe you are right. Throw the old tank back in wherever I can find space. I can sail the summer and see if I want the capacity and how the boat likes the tank placement. I can always start the process again in the fall. In addition, scoping out the perfect tank placement could become some afternoon's entertainment when I am stuck in the fog/drizzle/general ick for the second week straight! Gotta love those Maine summers.

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:43 am

bcooke wrote:I am beginning to think that the ideal doesn't exist and some compromise might be necessary.

Bingo! There are no ideal solutions when you're talking about a slack-bilged 28-footer with 8' beam. Leaving the tank as is creates compromises, but moving it elsewhere will compromise something else. There is limited space available, so it's clear that no ideals can be had.

I guess you have to choose where you'd most like to be inconvenienced. Or is that least like to be inconvenienced?

bcooke wrote:In addition, scoping out the perfect tank placement could become some afternoon's entertainment when I am stuck in the fog/drizzle/general ick for the second week straight! Gotta love those Maine summers.

We're hoping to avoid that this year...we had plenty of it last year, though.