1. #1
    Forum Member
    Not2L84U2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Catlin, IL, USA
    Posts
    958

    Default Side Dump Valves

    We are starting to spec a new tanker and there is some question over the practicality of side dump valves versus using just a chute to flow water to either side of the truck. Anyone have any insight? I'm sure that having the dump valves already in place is much more convenient, but is it cost effective? What is the benefit other than not having to manually put the chute in place for the initial dump?

  2. #2
    Forum Member
    MetalMedic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    The Home of Smucker's Jelly
    Posts
    1,266

    Default

    It is usually much faster. Idealy, you want a dump valve on both sides and one to the rear. If you really want to knock their socks off, have automatic chutes and dump valve controls installed so that the apparatus driver can operate them from the cab of the truck without leaving the driver's seat.
    Richard Nester
    Orrville (OH) Fire Dept.

    "People don't care what you know... until they know that you care." - Scott Bolleter

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Thats what our new tanker will have..pretty nice set up

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    466

    Default

    Rosenbauer recently introduced their swivel dump. It is similar to what you see on a concrete truck. Attached to the dump valve is a chute that swivels 180 degress. The chute folds in half so you can stow it easily.

    It looks like it is a rather good idea. We are considering retrofitting our existing tanker with this option. I've heard it's going to be very economical compared to putting tri-dumps on the trucks which is a good thing if your budget strapped like most of us out here.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Todd,

    Stop being such a Rosenbauer homer....that Pierce homer is bad enough!

    Rock

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    Not2L84U2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Catlin, IL, USA
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MetalMedic
    It is usually much faster. Idealy, you want a dump valve on both sides and one to the rear. If you really want to knock their socks off, have automatic chutes and dump valve controls installed so that the apparatus driver can operate them from the cab of the truck without leaving the driver's seat.
    And that's what we had discussed. Is the money that we are going to spend on these other chutes and the compartment room we are going to loose worth the cost. Is it more practical to have one rear dump that can be controlled from the cab with a manual chute.

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    242

    Default

    We have a new tanker on my department. It's an ALF tanker on a Freightshaker M2 chassis. We only have the dump out of the back of the truck, however, we also have a diamond plate chute that is angled so that it can be placed over the rear dump chute and redirect the water to either the left or the right, whichever your preference is. It works pretty well and I'm sure it's much cheaper than true side dump valves. If I'm not mistaken, doesn't NFPA require side dump capabilities on tankers now? Or did I make that up?

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    MetalMedic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    The Home of Smucker's Jelly
    Posts
    1,266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not2L84U2
    Is it more practical to have one rear dump that can be controlled from the cab with a manual chute.
    In my opinion, I would not put a rear dump on that was controlled from the driver's seat. The reduced visibility to the rear lends itself to the potential for something to go wrong in a big way. If you are stuck with just one, make it manual on the rear and do what you can to get 90 degree elbows on the shutes to redirect. If you can put on two side dumps for the cost of the remote controlled rear, I would go with one on each side. If you train your people on where to place the port-a-tanks, you should be able to side dump on all fires which will greatly reduce your turn-a-round times.
    Richard Nester
    Orrville (OH) Fire Dept.

    "People don't care what you know... until they know that you care." - Scott Bolleter

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    indiana
    Posts
    135

    Default

    i know of at least one department in my county that has accidently hit the dump button while enroute to the fire and arrived without any water.

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Our new tender has electric chutes and dump valves on the sides. We also placed a 12v light above each chute that is controlled from the drivers location. As they approach a portable tank at night, they can flip on the side light and light up where they need to dump.

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    Not2L84U2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Catlin, IL, USA
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefSquirrel
    If I'm not mistaken, doesn't NFPA require side dump capabilities on tankers now? Or did I make that up?
    Wouldn't the chute take care of having the capabilities of dumping on either side?

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not2L84U2
    Wouldn't the chute take care of having the capabilities of dumping on either side?
    Yes, from the research that I have done on them, chutes meet the NFPA requirements.

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not2L84U2
    Wouldn't the chute take care of having the capabilities of dumping on either side?

    That's what I was referring too - not side dump valves, but the ability to dump to the side. The elbow is a cheap alternative to true side dumps and, I'm glad to see that I correctly recalled, does meet NFPA guidelines.

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newbomb
    i know of at least one department in my county that has accidently hit the dump button while enroute to the fire and arrived without any water.

    One of our neighboring departments did this while responding 2nd out to a residential structure fire to back us up. Apparently the driver wasn't very familiar with the truck and thought he was turning on the warning lights and didn't realize his mistake until he glanced in his rearview mirrors and saw both side dump chutes extended and flowing water. 1800 gallons dumped into the ditchline on both sides of the road in only a few minutes. Thank goodness there wasn't someone traveling the other direction on the same road!
    Imagine my surprise when he arrives on scene, blows right past the drop tank and keeps on going to the fill site. Thankfully, we managed to get the fire under control with the tank water on our first due engine, so no real harm because of it. We did get a good laugh out of it afterwards when he told us what he had done!

  15. #15
    Forum Member
    LeuitEFDems's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Egremont, The Bizerkshires, MA
    Posts
    1,294

    Default

    As a member of a dept who's tanker has a (crappy, we had to make an extension for it) rear dump (manual) only, I'd say go for the 3 chutes. It's a royal PIA at multi-tank dump sites to have only the rear chute. One of our neighboring towns has the side chutes that are operated in the cab, and I have to say it definately is worth the extra $$/less compt space...especially this time of year. We are currently specing out a 1.5K-2k pumper/tanker and the idea of putting on the chutes is high up on the list (although this truck will replace one of our 1st due pumpers, not a tanker...but with our rural area, we need all the water we can get).
    The comments made by me are my opinions only, not of the Fire and EMS services I am affiliated with.

    I have lost my mind..has anyone seen it? it's not worth much..but it's mine

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    Not2L84U2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Catlin, IL, USA
    Posts
    958

    Default

    I definitely like the thought of pulling up to the dump site, flipping on the side light as you approach, having a water supply officer or some one there to guide you as you pull up, getting the thumbs up from him in the mirror, flipping a switch and watching a chute extend out and then seeing your 2,000 gallons dump, flipping the switch back, turning off your side light, and pulling away for your next load. How much simpler does it get? No more frozen hands from having to jockey around with the dump valve, no more having to walk through the mud and muck while you're at the dump site and then tracking it all back in your tanker, etc etc. I mean the pros are very significant, but the cons are too. What if the pneumatic valve doesn't operate. We have an electic powered cylinder that opens our dump valve for us now and it sticks all the time when you first go to use it. After a few times using it, it works fine. I can just imagine how many problems we might have later on down the road with 3 pneumatic/air valves and the chutes too. I'm still for getting them. I think the real challenge is convincing the chief. Anyone have any recorded times or any way to show time improvement using auto valves Vs. manual? That would be the key here. He's all about ISO and getting that time down and having that sustained water supply. Not that it is a bad thing.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber
    bendone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    I'm over here Now!
    Posts
    51

    Default Side Dump valves

    I would think that elbow chutes and /or swivel chutes would restrict your flow. We have had 3 dumps on our tankers since the first one in 1981.

  18. #18
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    In a van down by the river
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newbomb
    i know of at least one department in my county that has accidently hit the dump button while enroute to the fire and arrived without any water.


    But the road on the way to the dump site was oh-so-clean afterwards...

  19. #19
    Forum Member
    Not2L84U2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Catlin, IL, USA
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bendone
    I would think that elbow chutes and /or swivel chutes would restrict your flow. We have had 3 dumps on our tankers since the first one in 1981.
    Anyone else have any thoughts on this? I can see using that as an arguement for the time and flow factor of things.

  20. #20
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    West Oneonta,NY 13861
    Posts
    137

    Default

    We have dump chutes on both sides and rear of our 2003 tanker, electric all the way. We normally try to side dump everything, not always the case though. it will dump as quick off the sides as it does off back. We also installed a rear vision camera that is on all the time to monitor rear of unit. driver never leaves seat of truck. as for dumping load responding all our controls are hooded toggles, in cab as well at rear corners. keep it safe

  21. #21
    Forum Member
    Not2L84U2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Catlin, IL, USA
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Does the rear vision camera only monitor the rear dump or can you monitor the side dumps as well?

  22. #22
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Like Westofd says,use shielded switches. Yes,the rear vision camera will show all chutes/dump valves if you get the right one and position it properly. T.C.

  23. #23
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Smack dab in the middle of Central Illinois
    Posts
    209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newbomb
    i know of at least one department in my county that has accidently hit the dump button while enroute to the fire and arrived without any water.
    A good manufacturer, or sales rep, will recommend a cover installed over the switches in the cab. We have one tanker with air-operated side dumps and a manual on the rear, and a new one on order with air-operated dumps all around. Our builder puts covers over them as standard equipment.

    As far as the unsafe part of backing up and limited vision at the rear, you could go the super-expensive (and unneccesary on a tanker) route and install a rear vision camera, or do what should be done anytime you are backing a firetruck up at the scene and use a spotter.

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3

    Default

    We have side dumps and they work well in MOST situations. We are in rural Nebraska and we have had problems when setting up a dump tank on a rural farm household that does not have much gravel or even grass for that matter.

    It works fine for the first four or five tanker loads (thinking of LARGE haybarn fires), then the tank leaks some, not because anyone overfills it or anything , and the next thing you have is mud. Get to close and you can start sliding into the dump tanks due to large mudpuddle created.

    So when we set up in these conditions, we never use the side dumps as we have learned from our mistakes. When backing in, you have a lot more space from the axle to the tank and less problems. We always have a spotter for the dump tank as first thing on a large fire I assign an officer in charge of water supply. In most cases our hydrants are no more than five miles from the scene.

    If you are really that worried about dump valves being opened when they should not, then spec them to be tied to the park brake. Our SOP says the tanker operator must have the park brake engaged before opening the dump valve. Just another safety feature and it costs very little to have the manufacturer tie the dump valves to the park brake. I can not think of anytime we would need to use the dump valves without the park brake engaged.

    And teach driver training. I read another post on here where the idiot was actually thinking we could eliminate tankers. It not only takes training to drive, it takes training for some operators to back up and pull up to a side dump safely.

  25. #25
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    100

    Default check out these guys

    csiea.com. they build some top quality stuff!
    michael umphrey
    captain higgins twp fire/rescue/ems
    roscommon,mi

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Multiple Dump Tank Operations
    By Todd Trimble in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 10-14-2009, 12:47 AM
  2. Hale M.I.V. valves vs. piston intake valves
    By tmr91 in forum The Engineer
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-18-2002, 08:19 AM
  3. Both Side Impact Airbags Deployed
    By rmoore in forum University of Extrication
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-07-2002, 11:30 PM
  4. Rural Water Supply
    By TriTownship600 in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 10-17-2001, 08:10 PM
  5. Thermal Imaging SOG's
    By wtfd92 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 06-27-2001, 08:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register