Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 52 of 52
  1. #41
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,807

    Default

    What great timing for this bump! My Chief and a crew took in a mutual aid tanker shuttle drill where our engine was the supply piece. They had much difficulty using the 5" LDH with connecting, disconnecting and moving it. Being from a "rural water FD" many moons ago I laughed at them and asked why they didn't use the 3" hose. As many have stated, the 3" will generally fill as fast as the tanker will allow and the connections are where you make up any lost time.

    I guess in the above drill the critique discussion circled around how to relieve the water in the LDH. Some other problems I could see was that as described some of the M/A tankers had direct tank fills at or above head height! 1) this seems like a poor idea in general. 2) if using LDH, especially 5", the unsupported weight of the hose alone could pull the hose from the Storz coupling. Also as with FDC's and most pumpers the LDH intakes ought to have 30 degree tip downs regardless of height.

    Count me as another vote for 3" and using cam-locks.
    Last edited by RFDACM02; 07-01-2009 at 05:17 PM.


  2. #42
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Surprised noone mentioned this as we started a tanker task force recently but this has been practice in this area for a while. When setting up a fill site first engine establishes water supply either through draft preferrably or hydrant in a large open area for straight jobs and tractors to have plenty of room. then a 5" line off the discharge of an engine to an appliance all of us are mandated to carry around here which is 5" intake to 5" discharge and four 2 1/2" discharges 2 on each side of the 5" its called a 5 way water thief(posted picture in an attachment). However this is the key part to this working you have to put the valve the opposite way you would normally put it for any other fire opperation. so you connect the 5" from the engine discharge to the discharge side of the 5 way valve. Then you connect a 5" pony to the intake side of the 5 way valve and you put that to the tanker so now when you fill the tanker. When it is full you shut the ball valve for the 5" and shut the tank fill on the tanker and then use the 2 1/2" to drain the 5" which you can do because the valve is backwards all without shutting down the opperation.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  3. #43
    Forum Member IronsMan53's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    655

    Default

    Our department carries those and we call them 5" manifolds or the more common term - boat anchor. Even though we have them we still use the 5" to 2-1/2" gated wye which is lighter and more compact yet still accomplishes what we need done.

    The proplem with the way you described is that the way you use it you're still using heavy 5" line to fill the tanker. Spin that thing around to the normal use, run 5" to the intake from your source, then use the 2-1/2" discharges to supply 3" fill lines to the tanker.

    FM1 is accomplishing exactly what you are doing by using his hydrant valve to partially drain the hose. Why is he wanting to drain the hose? He is trying to figure out a way to help his guys because they are getting fatigued by using the 5" hose. Using the 5" hose is the key to the problem. Switch to dual 3" lines and the problem goes away.
    I can't believe they actually pay me to do this!!!

    One friend noted yesterday that a fire officer only carries a flashlight, sometimes prompting grumbling from firefighters who have to lug tools and hoses.
    "The old saying is you never know how heavy that flashlight can become," the friend said.
    -from a tragic story posted on firefighterclosecalls.com

  4. #44
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Penny Lane
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Dual 3" lines, preferably with cam-locks is definitely the way to go.

    Dual direct tank-fills, at least 3" ID (larger ID's are fine), with the appropriate fittings for the 3" hose, are the obvious counterpart to this. As ACM stated, mounting them low is paramount, and make sure to include bleeders/drains that are easily operable adjacent to the connection.

    Using an LDH manifold like the one pictured above, or some combination with (4) 2 1/2" ports, allows for constant filling of tankers: even though you're still only filling one tanker at a time, the make-and-break time is eliminated because you're filling one tanker while disconnecting the other and then connecting another.

  5. #45
    Forum Member bjlffire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Ne Missouri
    Posts
    342

    Default

    Ok, since I cannot find where the first question was answered can I ask this one again?

    What or how, with specific details, are those using LDH for tanker shuttle refill
    draining/releiving pressures for disconnect?

    i think 1 of the LDH gated manifolds would work if there was a drain at the out port of both.

    Thanks

  6. #46
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,614

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bjlffire View Post
    Ok, since I cannot find where the first question was answered can I ask this one again?

    What or how, with specific details, are those using LDH for tanker shuttle refill
    draining/releiving pressures for disconnect?

    i think 1 of the LDH gated manifolds would work if there was a drain at the out port of both.

    Thanks
    Most of the dedicated drain ports that I have seen are quite small. You might want to consider going through an LDH wye or a water thief with at least a 2-1/2" port, and turn the device around backwards. Remember the line you are draining, if it's 5", is holding approximately one gallon per foot. So if you have a 100' line out, you have to get rid of the biggest part of 100 gallons of water. With a litte drain port you'll have a long wait. It's one of several reasons that the tanker gurus in our county (I'm not one, but I try to pay attention to what they do and how they do it) have stuck with using two 2-1/2" or two 3" lines to fill with.
    Last edited by chiefengineer11; 09-01-2009 at 06:24 PM.

  7. #47
    Forum Member FIREMECH1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    HUSKER LAND
    Posts
    2,425

    Default

    Ooops, I forgot about updating this one.

    I was able to talk the training chief into getting 4 tankers for testing. 2 of ours, and 2 from different volly's (with personnel). We did the testing in late July, and ended up taking 2 days to do it, and 7 hours each day.

    The first day test was done by 3 FF's filling all 4 tankers as normal. 5" LDH straight from the hydrant to the tanker. After the 4th one was done, they were beat. On the same day, with 3 fresh FF's and my hookup, things looked better for the FF's. But, they were still exhausted. Not broken down as the previous 3, but still fatigued. We called it a day.

    What I didn't take for granted, or noticed, is the height of the hydrant valve on the hydrant, and the level of the tankers 5" intake. There was still a considerable amount of water in the line that didn't drain out, due to the almost level line from one to the other. As well, how the hose will flex, defeating the purpose.

    Before the start of the second day testing with the same volly guys, and fresh career guys, I had the FD's hose guy build me a 15' 5" LDH that would connect to the hydrant, and to the hydrant valve. As well, I made a securing plate for the hydrant valve, so it can sit on the ground.

    So the setup is this.... 15' of 5" from hydrant to hydrant valve. 10' of 5" from hydrant valve to tanker. Hydrant valve is on the ground. The man running the hydrant valve does have to put some weight on it to keep it on the ground, but not much.

    So the test begins. After filling up the fourth tanker, and after the first tanker emptied its water, the 3 FF's (career) were still comfortable enough to refill the first tanker, and did.

    We did the test again, this time using 3 volly "people", and they were also not over worked, or fatigued.

    Over all, the second day testing was a success, as to what they wanted.


    Please, don't get me wrong. The FD wanted a better solution for what they were doing, and I gave them an option that they are happy with. I will not say this is the best set up that everybody should go to. I'm sure there are better idea's out there.

    FM1
    I'm the one Fire and Rescue calls, when they need to be Rescued.

    Quote Originally Posted by EastKyFF
    "Firemens gets antsies. Theys wants to goes to fires. Sometimeses they haves to waits."

  8. #48
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    quarryville,pa
    Posts
    12

    Default

    In our area, the county standard is LDH from the hydrant / engine at draft to the manifold, then 4, 50' 2 1/2" or 3" lines with 3" stortz fittings for connection to the tankers being filled. We have a lot of rural area in our county, and in a lot of places, a tanker shuttle is how you get water to the fire. When a tanker arrives to be filled, we connect 2 of the 3" lines into the rear fills of said tanker and charge them. If another tanker arrives before the first is filled, we connect the other two 3" lines to it, and when the first tanker is full, we charge the lines to the second tanker, so there is no delay waiting to hook-up. There are times that engine companies in the county have filled 30,40,50 or more tankers during the course of a fire from one fill site, normally handling this task with a standard engine crew (4-6 members).
    James P

  9. #49
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FIREMECH1 View Post
    So the setup is this.... 15' of 5" from hydrant to hydrant valve. 10' of 5" from hydrant valve to tanker. Hydrant valve is on the ground. The man running the hydrant valve does have to put some weight on it to keep it on the ground, but not much.
    FM1
    Excellent idea FM! We've found that most firefighters struggle with our 4-way hydrant manifold. Even the fittest guys have a hard time making the hydrant in full gear, due to the weight, the general height of the steamer port and the general lack of perfect thread on the port. The evolution requires the fully geared firefighter to carry the manifold, a hose bag with two 30' 5" pony rolls and a gated wye. Then apply the manifold while bending over in an odd position and thread the steamer connection. Is this doable? Of course, it always is completed, but often the single FFer is struggling throughout. By utilizing a 15' section from the hydrant to the manifold the slowest part of the evolution will be much faster. It will add weight to the overall load that must be dropped, but I think it's worth having a go at.

  10. #50
    Forum Member FIREMECH1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    HUSKER LAND
    Posts
    2,425

    Default

    From the understanding that I got from one of the stations that has a tanker, they made an SOP/G that this is a 2 FF effort/job.

    How that works, I don't know. But I do know that the tankers are not manned, but that they pull either engine or truck guys to man it. As well, if one tanker goes, so does the other. Each is also sent with 2 FF's.

    I would assume that each ride a-long, would be the FF's that man the set up. But I'm only guessing.

    FM1
    I'm the one Fire and Rescue calls, when they need to be Rescued.

    Quote Originally Posted by EastKyFF
    "Firemens gets antsies. Theys wants to goes to fires. Sometimeses they haves to waits."

  11. #51
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pa Wilds
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Haven't seen any comments about size of vent - vs - fill rate. Fill rates need to be compatible with the vent or vents so that tanks are not compromised by over pressurization. I agree that when a tanker is sitting at a dump or fill site, it is not transporting water. As such the fill and dump times should be minimized. Filling at 1,000 gpm and using a 6" diameter round vent will cause about 0.96 psi when the water has to exit the vent. Doesn't seem like much, but the top of a 12' by 6' tank would see 9,976 pounds of force when it starts to overflow. Reducing the vent to 4" will result in a pressure rise to 4.34 psi. or 44,997 lbs wanting to pop the tank open. You can calculate this for your tanker by using the formula for flow from a nozzle and working backwards from a flow rate to the required nozzle pressure to cause that flow rate through your vent opening. Assuming that a particular tanker (tender) has a 10 inch round vent, then filling at 1500 gpm would cause only a 0.25 psi pressure inside the tank.
    Filling this tank with 50 ft. of 5" ldh and assuming 4 feet of 4" fill pipe, a pressure of about 10 psi to overcome friction loss. You might need 20 psi or so to overcome the internal losses of the piping in the engine..so filling with LDH at not more than 40 psi engine pressure. Replacing this arrangement with 50 feet of dual 3" lines into 4 ft of 2 1/2" for fill pipe at 750 gpm per line We would need about 3 psi in the pipe and 30 psi friction loss in the hose. Allowing 20 psi for loss internal to the pump, we gat a total of 53 psi at 1500 gpm fill rate. I fail to see the advantage of struggling with 5" line when filling at rates up to 1500 gpm.
    The calculations should be backed up with some tests to verify them. I have been teaching Rural F.G. Water Movement for 20 years and have yet to see an engine / tanker arrangement that can justify handling loaded LDH at a fill site. Vacuum tankers and self filling apparatus do require large suction sleeves for adequate fill rates.
    Last edited by KuhShise; 09-03-2009 at 05:22 PM.

  12. #52
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FIREMECH1 View Post
    I would love to do, what you have posted. Problem is, I'm the wrench monkey.
    The powers at the top, tell me what they want done, and I do it. It is rare for me to have any input on what might work better or faster.

    I'm like a grain of salt in an open wound to the "gold badges". It stings them when I make a suggestion on something they spent 3 months putting to paper for something, and then have to redo it, because it works better than what they envisioned.

    Their main concern is keeping the tank fill time as low as possible. I'll see if I can get what you described, and do a time run on it versus the way they want to keep doing it.

    And yes, I have worked the LDH, and it wasn't fun, at all.

    FM1

    FM1 I feel your pain. I'm in the same boat here. The only white shirt who listens to me is the Asst Chief. Thankfully he's the Operations Officer and he backs me up 100%. The B/C's, Capts, ect..... all hate it when I come up with an idea that contradicts thiers. It's sort of a love / hate relationship. Sometimes I love it, sometimes I hate it.

    Andy

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Cold Weather/Draining Pumps
    By ramseycl in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-04-2005, 10:19 AM
  2. 4"tanker fill
    By wcfd51 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-07-2002, 06:20 PM
  3. 4" tanker fill connection
    By wcfd51 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-15-2002, 07:38 PM
  4. Tanker Fill Hose & Adapters
    By wkc1902 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-15-2002, 12:56 AM
  5. Battery Disconnect SOP
    By S. Cheatham in forum University of Extrication
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-21-2001, 12:31 AM

Posting Permissions

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