New product

D

darren paget

New member
Oct 28, 1998
1,553
0
0
More research. I think it is a good idea but what I think is not always
right.
Would you like to gain the propane locker for a total storage locker? If
yes then read on. If no, delete.
I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
space immediately in front of the fuel tanks. The setup would fit inside
the frame space with no part of the tank outside or below the frame.
Supplied with a remote fill, it would hold ~70 lbs of propane.
Preliminary estimates put the total cost in the $500 - $600 range.
This takes the weight from behind and above the rear wheels and puts it
equal to the axle height of the wheels and in the centre of the frame. A
big plus to me. You then get the propane locker as a rather large
storage locker.
What do you think? Darren

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
It could be a lot cheaper if you were interested in only a single tank.
6 x 50 ~35 usable liters Darren

> In a message dated 4/6/2000 11:00:31 AM Central Daylight Time,

>
> storage locker.
> What do you think? Darren
> >>
>
> I like it ('cept the $$)
>
> Lanier
> Jackson, MS
> '73 GMC Excalibur
> '29 Mercedes SSK Toad
> '94 Tracker Toad
>
> Reality Check:::::
> There's no free lunch;
> You get what you pay for;
> And Nothing's gonna come in the mail !!
> So, Go Back To Work !!!

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
Certainly like the idea, and if you are able to
deliver a remote fill system that conforms to all
NFPA/ASME/DOT/CSA requirements for
pressure vessels of this type for $400 - $500, I
think it would be a bargain.

Conforming to all the regulatory and code
requirements might make it a whole bunch
more costly on a per copy basis, though,
especially in terms of the volume represented
by the GMC community.

Just chatted with two of the engineers here at
the large, SoCal-based SOB manufacturer
where I spend 1/3 of my life, and they got out
the book and after reading to me the applicable
section, mentioned that ASME has a very
stringent testing requirement for LPG tanks.

If you don't already have them, you might want
to get a copy of the ASME document outlining
the requirements for pressure vessels, and the
applicable NFPA sections.

Bear in mind that some LPG suppliers will not
touch - let alone fill - a tank that is not certified.

Get those certifications, and sign me up for one.

Toby Maki
'73 Glacier 230

Date sent: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600
From: Darren Paget
To: "gmcmotorhome"
Subject: GMC: New product
Send reply to: gmcmotorhome

> I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> space immediately in front of the fuel tanks.
> What do you think? Darren
 
Something I will have to work on towards the final design. This is one of
the criteria for MOT and DOT. Darren

> On Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600 Darren Paget

> > More research. I think it is a good idea but what I think is not
> always
> > right. Would you like to gain the propane locker for a total storage
> > locker? If yes then read on. If no, delete.
> > I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> > space immediately in front of the fuel tanks. The setup would fit
> inside
> > the frame space with no part of the tank outside or below the frame.
> > Supplied with a remote fill, it would hold ~70 lbs of propane.
> > Preliminary estimates put the total cost in the $500 - $600 range.
> > This takes the weight from behind and above the rear wheels and puts
> > it equal to the axle height of the wheels and in the centre of the
> > frame. A big plus to me. You then get the propane locker as a rather
> large
> > storage locker.
> > What do you think? Darren
> >
> > --
> > Darren Paget
> > 76 Experimental
> > Another Fab Day
> > http://www.TZEplus.com
> >
> Darren,
>
> I really like this idea. How would you handle the tank shut-off valve?
> This is important as accessability is critical for quick shut off.
>
> >
>
> David Lee Greenberg
> GMC Motorhome Registry
> Dedicated to the preservation of the Classic GMC
> http://www.gmcss.com/registry.htm

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
I like it. I assume that you would use a stock tank and provide the
connections/bracketing. That should help ease the certification process.

I think that when my lottery check comes in, I will sign it over to you to
get all the great stuff you have developed.

Ron and Julie
73 Painted Desert

> It could be a lot cheaper if you were interested in only a single tank.
> 6 x 50 ~35 usable liters Darren
>

>
> > In a message dated 4/6/2000 11:00:31 AM Central Daylight Time,

> >
> > > storage locker.
> > What do you think? Darren
> > >>
> >
> > I like it ('cept the $$)
> >
> > Lanier
> > Jackson, MS
> > '73 GMC Excalibur
> > '29 Mercedes SSK Toad
> > '94 Tracker Toad
> >
> > Reality Check:::::
> > There's no free lunch;
> > You get what you pay for;
> > And Nothing's gonna come in the mail !!
> > So, Go Back To Work !!!
>
> --
> Darren Paget
> 76 Experimental
> Another Fab Day
> http://www.TZEplus.com
 
Hmm,

Guess I read it a bit differently. I thought Darren was going to use an
off-the-shelf tank, not fab one himself. I think the latter option would
indeed be an excercise in frustration.

BTW, I don't think ASME actually tests pressure vessels, they just certify
the methods used and require testing of the product. The end result is
still definitely beyond the means of a small volume shop.

As an aside, I got involved in a beauracracy vs. corporate free-for-all
about ten years ago, when a certain company that sells carbonated, flavored,
sugar-water in little red cans bought a bunch of high tech canning machinery
from Germany. Germany has their own standards for pressure vessels and the
machinery didn't have the ASME plates attached. The jurisdictional
authority involved only recognized ASME certified vessels. Tax dollars won
out tho' when the JA's Chief Engineer exercised a little known exemption in
the code for vessels that contain only air at less than 25psi. Since CO2 is
a major component of air... well, you know the rest of the story.

Patrick

>
> Certainly like the idea, and if you are able to
> deliver a remote fill system that conforms to all
> NFPA/ASME/DOT/CSA requirements for
> pressure vessels of this type for $400 - $500, I
> think it would be a bargain.
>
> Conforming to all the regulatory and code
> requirements might make it a whole bunch
> more costly on a per copy basis, though,
> especially in terms of the volume represented
> by the GMC community.
>
> Just chatted with two of the engineers here at
> the large, SoCal-based SOB manufacturer
> where I spend 1/3 of my life, and they got out
> the book and after reading to me the applicable
> section, mentioned that ASME has a very
> stringent testing requirement for LPG tanks.
>
> If you don't already have them, you might want
> to get a copy of the ASME document outlining
> the requirements for pressure vessels, and the
> applicable NFPA sections.
>
> Bear in mind that some LPG suppliers will not
> touch - let alone fill - a tank that is not certified.
>
> Get those certifications, and sign me up for one.
>
>
> Toby Maki
> '73 Glacier 230
>
>
>
> Date sent: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600
> From: Darren Paget
> To: "gmcmotorhome"
>
> Subject: GMC: New product
> Send reply to: gmcmotorhome
>
>
> > I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> > space immediately in front of the fuel tanks.
> > What do you think? Darren
>
 
I hate to sound like a worrier, but I once ran over a muffler (in my old
Pontiac) that fell off the car just in front of me. As it went under my car,
it actually put a hole in the tank. Would there be any concern over this
with such a low mounted propane tank? Would there be any DOT type rules
governing placement of such tanks?

Tony Bad

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Darren Paget
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: GMC: New product

> It could be a lot cheaper if you were interested in only a single tank.
> 6 x 50 ~35 usable liters Darren
>

>
> > In a message dated 4/6/2000 11:00:31 AM Central Daylight Time,

> >
> > > storage locker.
> > What do you think? Darren
> > >>
> >
> > I like it ('cept the $$)
> >
> > Lanier
> > Jackson, MS
> > '73 GMC Excalibur
> > '29 Mercedes SSK Toad
> > '94 Tracker Toad
> >
> > Reality Check:::::
> > There's no free lunch;
> > You get what you pay for;
> > And Nothing's gonna come in the mail !!
> > So, Go Back To Work !!!
>
> --
> Darren Paget
> 76 Experimental
> Another Fab Day
> http://www.TZEplus.com
>
>
>
 
It will be certified. I wouldn't do it any other way. It is the certification process which
is the expensive part. Each tank will have the certification stamp on it, and they will be
remote filled, with shutoffs and all required elements. Darren

> Certainly like the idea, and if you are able to
> deliver a remote fill system that conforms to all
> NFPA/ASME/DOT/CSA requirements for
> pressure vessels of this type for $400 - $500, I
> think it would be a bargain.
>
> Conforming to all the regulatory and code
> requirements might make it a whole bunch
> more costly on a per copy basis, though,
> especially in terms of the volume represented
> by the GMC community.
>
> Just chatted with two of the engineers here at
> the large, SoCal-based SOB manufacturer
> where I spend 1/3 of my life, and they got out
> the book and after reading to me the applicable
> section, mentioned that ASME has a very
> stringent testing requirement for LPG tanks.
>
> If you don't already have them, you might want
> to get a copy of the ASME document outlining
> the requirements for pressure vessels, and the
> applicable NFPA sections.
>
> Bear in mind that some LPG suppliers will not
> touch - let alone fill - a tank that is not certified.
>
> Get those certifications, and sign me up for one.
>
> Toby Maki
> '73 Glacier 230
>
> Date sent: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600
> From: Darren Paget
> To: "gmcmotorhome"
> Subject: GMC: New product
> Send reply to: gmcmotorhome
>
> > I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> > space immediately in front of the fuel tanks.
> > What do you think? Darren

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
On Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600 Darren Paget
writes:
> More research. I think it is a good idea but what I think is not
always
> right. Would you like to gain the propane locker for a total storage
> locker? If yes then read on. If no, delete.
> I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> space immediately in front of the fuel tanks. The setup would fit
inside
> the frame space with no part of the tank outside or below the frame.
> Supplied with a remote fill, it would hold ~70 lbs of propane.
> Preliminary estimates put the total cost in the $500 - $600 range.
> This takes the weight from behind and above the rear wheels and puts
> it equal to the axle height of the wheels and in the centre of the
> frame. A big plus to me. You then get the propane locker as a rather
large
> storage locker.
> What do you think? Darren
>
> --
> Darren Paget
> 76 Experimental
> Another Fab Day
> http://www.TZEplus.com
>
Darren,

I really like this idea. How would you handle the tank shut-off valve?
This is important as accessability is critical for quick shut off.

>

David Lee Greenberg
GMC Motorhome Registry
Dedicated to the preservation of the Classic GMC
http://www.gmcss.com/registry.htm
 
That's actually why I am going through all of this. There is no stock tank
available that size. The smallest I could find was 8" diameter. I also
rechecked my calculations. The size would be 38 usable liters. Smaller than I
would have liked but I don't plan on trying to make the frame on the GM
larger. Darren

> I like it. I assume that you would use a stock tank and provide the
> connections/bracketing. That should help ease the certification process.
>
> I think that when my lottery check comes in, I will sign it over to you to
> get all the great stuff you have developed.
>
> Ron and Julie
> 73 Painted Desert
>

>
> > It could be a lot cheaper if you were interested in only a single tank.
> > 6 x 50 ~35 usable liters Darren
> >

> >
> > > In a message dated 4/6/2000 11:00:31 AM Central Daylight Time,

> > >
> > > > > storage locker.
> > > What do you think? Darren
> > > >>
> > >
> > > I like it ('cept the $$)
> > >
> > > Lanier
> > > Jackson, MS
> > > '73 GMC Excalibur
> > > '29 Mercedes SSK Toad
> > > '94 Tracker Toad
> > >
> > > Reality Check:::::
> > > There's no free lunch;
> > > You get what you pay for;
> > > And Nothing's gonna come in the mail !!
> > > So, Go Back To Work !!!
> >
> > --
> > Darren Paget
> > 76 Experimental
> > Another Fab Day
> > http://www.TZEplus.com

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
The wall of a propane tank is quite a bit thicker than a fuel tank.
This is also a reason for the certification process. All these concerns are
addressed. That is why the certification costs so much money. This is also the
reason I am trying to keep the tank in the confines of the frame. I won't be
doing it unless I can keep it there. Darren

> I hate to sound like a worrier, but I once ran over a muffler (in my old
> Pontiac) that fell off the car just in front of me. As it went under my car,
> it actually put a hole in the tank. Would there be any concern over this
> with such a low mounted propane tank? Would there be any DOT type rules
> governing placement of such tanks?
>
> Tony Bad
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Darren Paget
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 2:26 PM
> Subject: Re: GMC: New product
>
> > It could be a lot cheaper if you were interested in only a single tank.
> > 6 x 50 ~35 usable liters Darren
> >

> >
> > > In a message dated 4/6/2000 11:00:31 AM Central Daylight Time,

> > >
> > > > > storage locker.
> > > What do you think? Darren
> > > >>
> > >
> > > I like it ('cept the $$)
> > >
> > > Lanier
> > > Jackson, MS
> > > '73 GMC Excalibur
> > > '29 Mercedes SSK Toad
> > > '94 Tracker Toad
> > >
> > > Reality Check:::::
> > > There's no free lunch;
> > > You get what you pay for;
> > > And Nothing's gonna come in the mail !!
> > > So, Go Back To Work !!!
> >
> > --
> > Darren Paget
> > 76 Experimental
> > Another Fab Day
> > http://www.TZEplus.com
> >
> >
> >

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
I am not planning on fabricating this myself. I have to use a shop that is ASME
certified to build it. Because of the cost of the certification I am not
planning to have just one built. If I can do it in any kind of quantity the
certification can be spread between all the tanks. I won't be tackling this if
I am the only name on the list. I am not rich yet. As Canada and the US have
very similar regulations for propane tanks it is not that difficult to get them
approved for both countries. Once you have one it is only red tape to get the
other, and not much at that. I like this idea because I could use the storage
for my 3 kids stuff, or the BBQ, or all my hoses, wood blocking, or even
incorporate the area the locker takes up into the interior of the motor home. I
also like the idea of having the propane tank protected by the frame. It always
looks a little scary hanging in the unprotected rear locker just waiting to get
hit by some idiot in a car.
Darren

> Hmm,
>
> Guess I read it a bit differently. I thought Darren was going to use an
> off-the-shelf tank, not fab one himself. I think the latter option would
> indeed be an excercise in frustration.
>
> BTW, I don't think ASME actually tests pressure vessels, they just certify
> the methods used and require testing of the product. The end result is
> still definitely beyond the means of a small volume shop.
>
> As an aside, I got involved in a beauracracy vs. corporate free-for-all
> about ten years ago, when a certain company that sells carbonated, flavored,
> sugar-water in little red cans bought a bunch of high tech canning machinery
> from Germany. Germany has their own standards for pressure vessels and the
> machinery didn't have the ASME plates attached. The jurisdictional
> authority involved only recognized ASME certified vessels. Tax dollars won
> out tho' when the JA's Chief Engineer exercised a little known exemption in
> the code for vessels that contain only air at less than 25psi. Since CO2 is
> a major component of air... well, you know the rest of the story.
>
> Patrick
>

> >
> > Certainly like the idea, and if you are able to
> > deliver a remote fill system that conforms to all
> > NFPA/ASME/DOT/CSA requirements for
> > pressure vessels of this type for $400 - $500, I
> > think it would be a bargain.
> >
> > Conforming to all the regulatory and code
> > requirements might make it a whole bunch
> > more costly on a per copy basis, though,
> > especially in terms of the volume represented
> > by the GMC community.
> >
> > Just chatted with two of the engineers here at
> > the large, SoCal-based SOB manufacturer
> > where I spend 1/3 of my life, and they got out
> > the book and after reading to me the applicable
> > section, mentioned that ASME has a very
> > stringent testing requirement for LPG tanks.
> >
> > If you don't already have them, you might want
> > to get a copy of the ASME document outlining
> > the requirements for pressure vessels, and the
> > applicable NFPA sections.
> >
> > Bear in mind that some LPG suppliers will not
> > touch - let alone fill - a tank that is not certified.
> >
> > Get those certifications, and sign me up for one.
> >
> >
> > Toby Maki
> > '73 Glacier 230
> >
> >
> >
> > Date sent: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600
> > From: Darren Paget
> > To: "gmcmotorhome"
> >
> > Subject: GMC: New product
> > Send reply to: gmcmotorhome
> >
> >
> > > I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> > > space immediately in front of the fuel tanks.
> > > What do you think? Darren
> >

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
Darren,
I'd love to have that added space and the protection for the tank that the frame
could provide. I would want a tank with at least the capacity of the one that I
have now in my Palm Beach.

Someplace I saw a tank similar to what you propose. I don't know if it was on the
internet, one of the GMC motorhome magazines we get or where it was. Maybe it was
all in my head, I don't know. Do you recall seeing something similar?

I hope you can pull this off. If you do, I'll be in line for one. That is, and it
should go without saying, if it can be accepted by our insurance companies. I think
they are the real entities that control what can and can not be done. I don't have
any idea how that would work though getting their blessing.
Richard Waters

> I am not planning on fabricating this myself. I have to use a shop that is ASME
> certified to build it. Because of the cost of the certification I am not
> planning to have just one built. If I can do it in any kind of quantity the
> certification can be spread between all the tanks. I won't be tackling this if
> I am the only name on the list. I am not rich yet. As Canada and the US have
> very similar regulations for propane tanks it is not that difficult to get them
> approved for both countries. Once you have one it is only red tape to get the
> other, and not much at that. I like this idea because I could use the storage
> for my 3 kids stuff, or the BBQ, or all my hoses, wood blocking, or even
> incorporate the area the locker takes up into the interior of the motor home. I
> also like the idea of having the propane tank protected by the frame. It always
> looks a little scary hanging in the unprotected rear locker just waiting to get
> hit by some idiot in a car.
> Darren
>

>
> > Hmm,
> >
> > Guess I read it a bit differently. I thought Darren was going to use an
> > off-the-shelf tank, not fab one himself. I think the latter option would
> > indeed be an excercise in frustration.
> >
> > BTW, I don't think ASME actually tests pressure vessels, they just certify
> > the methods used and require testing of the product. The end result is
> > still definitely beyond the means of a small volume shop.
> >
> > As an aside, I got involved in a beauracracy vs. corporate free-for-all
> > about ten years ago, when a certain company that sells carbonated, flavored,
> > sugar-water in little red cans bought a bunch of high tech canning machinery
> > from Germany. Germany has their own standards for pressure vessels and the
> > machinery didn't have the ASME plates attached. The jurisdictional
> > authority involved only recognized ASME certified vessels. Tax dollars won
> > out tho' when the JA's Chief Engineer exercised a little known exemption in
> > the code for vessels that contain only air at less than 25psi. Since CO2 is
> > a major component of air... well, you know the rest of the story.
> >
> > Patrick
> >

> > >
> > > Certainly like the idea, and if you are able to
> > > deliver a remote fill system that conforms to all
> > > NFPA/ASME/DOT/CSA requirements for
> > > pressure vessels of this type for $400 - $500, I
> > > think it would be a bargain.
> > >
> > > Conforming to all the regulatory and code
> > > requirements might make it a whole bunch
> > > more costly on a per copy basis, though,
> > > especially in terms of the volume represented
> > > by the GMC community.
> > >
> > > Just chatted with two of the engineers here at
> > > the large, SoCal-based SOB manufacturer
> > > where I spend 1/3 of my life, and they got out
> > > the book and after reading to me the applicable
> > > section, mentioned that ASME has a very
> > > stringent testing requirement for LPG tanks.
> > >
> > > If you don't already have them, you might want
> > > to get a copy of the ASME document outlining
> > > the requirements for pressure vessels, and the
> > > applicable NFPA sections.
> > >
> > > Bear in mind that some LPG suppliers will not
> > > touch - let alone fill - a tank that is not certified.
> > >
> > > Get those certifications, and sign me up for one.
> > >
> > >
> > > Toby Maki
> > > '73 Glacier 230
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Date sent: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600
> > > From: Darren Paget
> > > To: "gmcmotorhome"
> > >
> > > Subject: GMC: New product
> > > Send reply to: gmcmotorhome
> > >
> > >
> > > > I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> > > > space immediately in front of the fuel tanks.
> > > > What do you think? Darren
> > >
>
> --
> Darren Paget
> 76 Experimental
> Another Fab Day
> http://www.TZEplus.com
 
Richard, gimmee a break willya'! I thought I killed this myth months
ago. Read your motorhome policy and see if it excludes non-ASME
certified pressure vessels. It'd be a very rare bird if it did.

You could roll up and weld your own LP tank tomorrow and no insurance
company, bureaucrat or policeman would come to fine you or lock you
up(just don't try to start selling them). However, no filling
station in their right mind would put an ounce of gas in it. All this
regulatory stuff is done to control commerce (and insurance companies
aren't regulatory agencies, thank goodness!) - the individual is still
free to do something stupid if he chooses.

The insurance companies aren't some evil empire. Shoot, they can't even
agree on simple stuff - that's why Underwriter's Laboratories is an
independent agency. It's the only way to get a decision for Pete's
sake.

Patrick

>
> I hope you can pull this off. If you do, I'll be in line for one. That is, and it
> should go without saying, if it can be accepted by our insurance companies. I think
> they are the real entities that control what can and can not be done. I don't have
> any idea how that would work though getting their blessing.
> Richard Waters
- --
Patrick Flowers
Mailto:patrick

The GMC Motorhome Page
http://www.gmcmotorhome.com
 
I am not suggesting it has been a problem. I am only making the point because some
people have brought up the safety issue. I thought that since the issue came up I
might as well address the whole issue.
Does every one also have the stop fill valve on their tanks. GM also made non
appliance connections with unions and t's inside the body of the motor home.. This
practice was disallowed a few years back. Another safety issue. Two point seat
belts. It is possible to go on and on. That is one of the reasons for this forum.
Many changes have been made to GM's of this group. A lot have been related to safety
issues which may or may not have been real concerns. By today's standards the GM, as
it is, would not be built without some of the safety changes that members of this
group have done themselves. If I can supply something which, possibly, may be safer
and at the same time give an added bonus of extra cargo room I will look into the
possibility. If you are happy with what you have, great. That is one reason why
these coaches are still on the road, and a reason I have one myself. Keep the shiny
side up, unless you have chromed the bottom. Darren

> Anyone heard of a GMC LP tank being a problem in the last 27 years?
>

> >I am not planning on fabricating this myself. I have to use a shop that is ASME
> >certified to build it. Because of the cost of the certification I am not
> >planning to have just one built. If I can do it in any kind of quantity the
> >certification can be spread between all the tanks. I won't be tackling
> this if
> >I am the only name on the list. I am not rich yet. As Canada and the US have
> >very similar regulations for propane tanks it is not that difficult to get them
> >approved for both countries. Once you have one it is only red tape to get the
> >other, and not much at that. I like this idea because I could use the storage
> >for my 3 kids stuff, or the BBQ, or all my hoses, wood blocking, or even
> >incorporate the area the locker takes up into the interior of the motor home. I
> >also like the idea of having the propane tank protected by the frame. It always
> >looks a little scary hanging in the unprotected rear locker just waiting to get
> >hit by some idiot in a car.
> >Darren
> >

> >
> >> Hmm,
> >>
> >> Guess I read it a bit differently. I thought Darren was going to use an
> >> off-the-shelf tank, not fab one himself. I think the latter option would
> >> indeed be an excercise in frustration.
> >>
> >> BTW, I don't think ASME actually tests pressure vessels, they just certify
> >> the methods used and require testing of the product. The end result is
> >> still definitely beyond the means of a small volume shop.
> >>
> >> As an aside, I got involved in a beauracracy vs. corporate free-for-all
> >> about ten years ago, when a certain company that sells carbonated, flavored,
> >> sugar-water in little red cans bought a bunch of high tech canning machinery
> >> from Germany. Germany has their own standards for pressure vessels and the
> >> machinery didn't have the ASME plates attached. The jurisdictional
> >> authority involved only recognized ASME certified vessels. Tax dollars won
> >> out tho' when the JA's Chief Engineer exercised a little known exemption in
> >> the code for vessels that contain only air at less than 25psi. Since CO2 is
> >> a major component of air... well, you know the rest of the story.
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >>

> >> >
> >> > Certainly like the idea, and if you are able to
> >> > deliver a remote fill system that conforms to all
> >> > NFPA/ASME/DOT/CSA requirements for
> >> > pressure vessels of this type for $400 - $500, I
> >> > think it would be a bargain.
> >> >
> >> > Conforming to all the regulatory and code
> >> > requirements might make it a whole bunch
> >> > more costly on a per copy basis, though,
> >> > especially in terms of the volume represented
> >> > by the GMC community.
> >> >
> >> > Just chatted with two of the engineers here at
> >> > the large, SoCal-based SOB manufacturer
> >> > where I spend 1/3 of my life, and they got out
> >> > the book and after reading to me the applicable
> >> > section, mentioned that ASME has a very
> >> > stringent testing requirement for LPG tanks.
> >> >
> >> > If you don't already have them, you might want
> >> > to get a copy of the ASME document outlining
> >> > the requirements for pressure vessels, and the
> >> > applicable NFPA sections.
> >> >
> >> > Bear in mind that some LPG suppliers will not
> >> > touch - let alone fill - a tank that is not certified.
> >> >
> >> > Get those certifications, and sign me up for one.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Toby Maki
> >> > '73 Glacier 230
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Date sent: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 08:39:21 -0600
> >> > From: Darren Paget
> >> > To: "gmcmotorhome"
> >> >
> >> > Subject: GMC: New product
> >> > Send reply to: gmcmotorhome
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > I am looking into propane tanks mounted under the floor in the frame
> >> > > space immediately in front of the fuel tanks.
> >> > > What do you think? Darren
> >> >
> >
> >--
> > Darren Paget
> > 76 Experimental
> > Another Fab Day
> > http://www.TZEplus.com
> >
> >
> >
> >

- --
Darren Paget
76 Experimental
Another Fab Day
http://www.TZEplus.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Applied GMC
GMCMI Fall 2026 Rally

Share this page

Share this page
Top Bottom
Back