[8weekly]

Haha you obviously no nothing about vehicles mate, if your trying to tell me that having some straps to the ancir points in the back of the van is SAFER than having it bolted to your chassis, your an idiot and shouldnt be giving people advice

I think you should learn to read... and spell. No one has said that and no one has given advice.

[Perfect Windows]

Look at the crash at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMl-WQ5XkMI .  Time from hitting wall at 45mph to dead stop of around 70 milliseconds, so 0.07 seconds.  Acceleration = -287m/s/s.

Force = mass x acceleration so you get an effective weight of a 650L tank during that deceleration of 186 tons.  A 1000L tank would be about 287 tons.

Now the news is that that was an empty van in the video, so your full van will take more time to stop and increase the amount of the van that crumples, but the numbers are a good indication of the scale of the problem.  If your luggage hooks/straps can't take a couple of hundred tons then you're going to have a headache.

Before you all respond, I know I'm wrong and that your mate was unharmed a 200mph crash with a 2 ton bale of paper in the back secured with a bungee cord to a paper clip round the back bumper but the physics is unassailable.  I also know that you've never heard of anyone being hurt in an accident so it can't possibly happen.

Vin

Thought about this overnight and, apologies, schoolboy error in there.  Those numbers are in Newtons, so to get to effective weight need to divide by 9.81, so 19 tonnes and 29 tons respectively.  Still far more than enough to tear out hooks welded to the floor of your van.

Vin

[Frankybadboy]

strapping to the eye bolts in the van depends on what ratchet straps you use and the ones I've seen used most of the time are not up to the job

 

[Clever Forum Name]

I had floor plates welded into my van floor with welded nuts on the underside so I could bolt my tank in as I have false floor.

It's not idea but I feel far safer knowing I have this over it being strapped in. BUT I don't think in way shape or form it's far safer than the anchor points.

If I could have welded in massive A4 sized plates then I would feel safer.

What does make me feel safe is the bulkhead. The standard bulk head in a transit or vivaro is flimsy at best. The one I had in installed is a proper bulkhead costing nearly a
£1000. It's reinforced with 4 struts. It was by pure luck it was installed before I bought the van!!!

[koopmaster]

my 400L tank is strapped in top and back via the floor bolts.  My back is protected by a metal sheet, its a ford escort old BT van.

I had a crash at 20 MPH last year and the tank only moved a few centimeters.  I did have to empty the tank to push it back but it took less than a minute.

All my round is local so I don't actually drive faster that 30 anyway.

[telfordwindowclnr]

My flat tank is strapped in across the top to stop upwards shift in the event of an accident and has wood wedged down the sides to stop sideways shift .

Also have a double bulkhead and my tank does not move an inch . Mike

+1.

I also have a 1000L tank in a van which is bolted through the floor. Both tanks were fitted by a professional company. There is no way I'd trust myself to do any of this stuff myself.

[Simon Mess]

I used to think that a tank bolted in would be better, but i am not convinced now. A tank bolted in has absolutely no give, it is rigid, and as one of the previous posts pointed out, the forces involved are absolutely immense. I strongly suspect the bolts would simply shear off in the event of i higher speed impact. Proper load securing straps are woven, so by their nature they are going to have some 'give', which would absorb a good portion of the forces.

If you think about it, that is exactly the same principle of how car safety has moved on so far in the last few decades. It used to be thought that simply making the car extremely strong was the best way, but of course this made the car effectively rigid, transferring all of the force of the impact directly to the occupants with potentially dire consequences. Cars now are designed to crumple, to absorb the force of the impact.

Another point is, why out of all van drivers, do window cleaners need to have their loads bolted in and/or crash tested?. What proportion of the vans on the road have their loads bolted in?. I would guess it will be absolutely tiny!. So if a builder thinks it is perfectly safe to secure a ton of bricks on a pallet in the back of his van using straps, why would it be unsafe to do the same with a box full of water?. Truck drivers use straps to secure loads many many times heavier than what any of us are going to be carrying.

For an extra 'safety' feature, i have been thinking of having an engineering shop make up a (shallow) 'V' shaped bit of metal, which would be welded on to my 'b' pillars about 8" above the load bay floor with the point facing to the rear. If, in the event of an accident, and if my tank then moved forward, the point of the 'V' would puncture the tank, releasing the water.

One last thing. Personally, i find it quite ironic the views on here regarding tank security, when attitudes in general to payloads and gvw are so lax. If you are quite unconcerned about driving around overweight with all the safety implications that entails such as overheating brakes, over stressing axles, bearings, etc (or even unwilling to accept that you may be), then i find it bizarre and more than a little contradictory that such strong views are being posted!.

[gary999]

i think a tank hitting you in the back of the head is secondry to
the steering wheel smashing through your chest and killing you

[Mike #1]

i think a tank hitting you in the back of the head is secondry to
the steering wheel smashing through your chest and killing you

Even worse if you are nearly overloaded all the time and  more chance of the above happening the more weight their is to shift forward in the event of an accident . Mike

[Bill.upnw]

Think what i would like to see is a crash at. 30mph with tank strapped in

[Bill.upnw]

I used to think that a tank bolted in would be better, but i am not convinced now. A tank bolted in has absolutely no give, it is rigid, and as one of the previous posts pointed out, the forces involved are absolutely immense. I strongly suspect the bolts would simply shear off in the event of i higher speed impact. Proper load securing straps are woven, so by their nature they are going to have some 'give', which would absorb a good portion of the forces.

If you think about it, that is exactly the same principle of how car safety has moved on so far in the last few decades. It used to be thought that simply making the car extremely strong was the best way, but of course this made the car effectively rigid, transferring all of the force of the impact directly to the occupants with potentially dire consequences. Cars now are designed to crumple, to absorb the force of the impact.

Another point is, why out of all van drivers, do window cleaners need to have their loads bolted in and/or crash tested?. What proportion of the vans on the road have their loads bolted in?. I would guess it will be absolutely tiny!. So if a builder thinks it is perfectly safe to secure a ton of bricks on a pallet in the back of his van using straps, why would it be unsafe to do the same with a box full of water?. Truck drivers use straps to secure loads many many times heavier than what any of us are going to be carrying.

For an extra 'safety' feature, i have been thinking of having an engineering shop make up a (shallow) 'V' shaped bit of metal, which would be welded on to my 'b' pillars about 8" above the load bay floor with the point facing to the rear. If, in the event of an accident, and if my tank then moved forward, the point of the 'V' would puncture the tank, releasing the water.

One last thing. Personally, i find it quite ironic the views on here regarding tank security, when attitudes in general to payloads and gvw are so lax. If you are quite unconcerned about driving around overweight with all the safety implications that entails such as overheating brakes, over stressing axles, bearings, etc (or even unwilling to accept that you may be), then i find it bizarre and more than a little contradictory that such strong views are being posted!.

Thats what made me buy a brodex system

There lids are tight enough to keep water in, but on the VOSA vehicle test, where they crash at 30mph, because of the lid they have used and how the tanks are baffled internally, its designed to push the lid off and water goes everywere, rather than there being a big tank on the roll

[dannymack]

I gotta say I would think it is safer having it bolted but I had this done by Omnipole in my old van which when I wanted to take it out as I sold the van what a nightmare, the Machanic had to remove the petrol tank, I had to squeeze down the side of the tank as when the Machanic undone the bolt under the van the nut kept turning. If I was to move the tank say Into a hired van if mine was off the road there would of been no chance so will never have tank bolted down again.
With this van it's all strapped in plus I have a steel bulk head it sits right against and hasn't budged an inch. If I need to take tank out no a problem anymore. 👍👍👍

[robert mitchell]

the anchor rings in most vans are rated to 250kg and they are welded usually to plate metal , not that this matters much as i think the ring would break first.

The difference with a lorry carrying ibcs , pallets of bricks etc is the the load anchors are attached to the chassis of the trailer/bed and are rated much much higher than the anchor points in vans.

The straps they use are much higher rated than the average shop bought ones.

I would certainly be interested in seeing a crash test with with just straps on to anchor points .

 I went for a crash tested tank for my own peace of mind and i think its well worth the money .

[AuRavelling79]

Me ... 650L tank.


My van has a factory fitted bulkhead. The front upper edge of the tank (layflat wyedale) butts against the bulkhead which angles back slightly, top further back than the base.

The tank sits in a frame that is 90mm x 90 mm angle iron at the back of the tank. The sides and front of the tank sit in 50 x 50 mm angle iron. The corners of the frame are welded and the side lengths welded to the 90 x 90 mm at the back.

The frame is bolted through the floor with high ten tensile 12mm bolts to a mixture of 100mm x 100 mm plates and some 50 x 50 angle iron across the underneath of chassis members with bolts either side of the chassis member. The tank is strapped to the 90mm x 90mm angle with 2 x 5 tonne straps wound 3 times round through the baffle in the middle.

I'm happy with that; but I check the strap integrity for rot every couple of months when I remember.

All done by me and a mate that does some welding. Total weight 35kg for the frame, bolts. plates etc...

[Perfect Windows]

I used to think that a tank bolted in would be better, but i am not convinced now. A tank bolted in has absolutely no give, it is rigid, and as one of the previous posts pointed out, the forces involved are absolutely immense. I strongly suspect the bolts would simply shear off in the event of i higher speed impact. Proper load securing straps are woven, so by their nature they are going to have some 'give', which would absorb a good portion of the forces.

If you think about it, that is exactly the same principle of how car safety has moved on so far in the last few decades. It used to be thought that simply making the car extremely strong was the best way, but of course this made the car effectively rigid, transferring all of the force of the impact directly to the occupants with potentially dire consequences. Cars now are designed to crumple, to absorb the force of the impact.

Another point is, why out of all van drivers, do window cleaners need to have their loads bolted in and/or crash tested?. What proportion of the vans on the road have their loads bolted in?. I would guess it will be absolutely tiny!. So if a builder thinks it is perfectly safe to secure a ton of bricks on a pallet in the back of his van using straps, why would it be unsafe to do the same with a box full of water?. Truck drivers use straps to secure loads many many times heavier than what any of us are going to be carrying.

For an extra 'safety' feature, i have been thinking of having an engineering shop make up a (shallow) 'V' shaped bit of metal, which would be welded on to my 'b' pillars about 8" above the load bay floor with the point facing to the rear. If, in the event of an accident, and if my tank then moved forward, the point of the 'V' would puncture the tank, releasing the water.

One last thing. Personally, i find it quite ironic the views on here regarding tank security, when attitudes in general to payloads and gvw are so lax. If you are quite unconcerned about driving around overweight with all the safety implications that entails such as overheating brakes, over stressing axles, bearings, etc (or even unwilling to accept that you may be), then i find it bizarre and more than a little contradictory that such strong views are being posted!.

Ref bolting, the idea is that with Ionics, the cage distorts.  With Grippa and Purefreedom, the van crumples - look at the after pics and the van is bent in the middle - absorbs a lot of energy.

The paragraph about builders, I've highlighted.  Don't confuse a builder being prepared to do something with it being safe.

I think the puncture idea forgets that the water isn't going to be sloshing forward; it's going to be slamming forward.  There's going to be no time for it to get out of the tank in any meaningful way.

Agree ref payloads, etc.

Vin

[Dave Willis]

Depends if you have an upright or layflat tank. The strapping angles are all wrong on an upright tank.

[♠Winp®oClean♠]

I used to think that a tank bolted in would be better, but i am not convinced now. A tank bolted in has absolutely no give, it is rigid, and as one of the previous posts pointed out, the forces involved are absolutely immense. I strongly suspect the bolts would simply shear off in the event of i higher speed impact. Proper load securing straps are woven, so by their nature they are going to have some 'give', which would absorb a good portion of the forces.

If you think about it, that is exactly the same principle of how car safety has moved on so far in the last few decades. It used to be thought that simply making the car extremely strong was the best way, but of course this made the car effectively rigid, transferring all of the force of the impact directly to the occupants with potentially dire consequences. Cars now are designed to crumple, to absorb the force of the impact.

Another point is, why out of all van drivers, do window cleaners need to have their loads bolted in and/or crash tested?. What proportion of the vans on the road have their loads bolted in?. I would guess it will be absolutely tiny!. So if a builder thinks it is perfectly safe to secure a ton of bricks on a pallet in the back of his van using straps, why would it be unsafe to do the same with a box full of water?. Truck drivers use straps to secure loads many many times heavier than what any of us are going to be carrying.

For an extra 'safety' feature, i have been thinking of having an engineering shop make up a (shallow) 'V' shaped bit of metal, which would be welded on to my 'b' pillars about 8" above the load bay floor with the point facing to the rear. If, in the event of an accident, and if my tank then moved forward, the point of the 'V' would puncture the tank, releasing the water.

One last thing. Personally, i find it quite ironic the views on here regarding tank security, when attitudes in general to payloads and gvw are so lax. If you are quite unconcerned about driving around overweight with all the safety implications that entails such as overheating brakes, over stressing axles, bearings, etc (or even unwilling to accept that you may be), then i find it bizarre and more than a little contradictory that such strong views are being posted!.

Ref bolting, the idea is that with Ionics, the cage distorts.  With Grippa and Purefreedom, the van crumples - look at the after pics and the van is bent in the middle - absorbs a lot of energy.

The paragraph about builders, I've highlighted.  Don't confuse a builder being prepared to do something with it being safe.

I think the puncture idea forgets that the water isn't going to be sloshing forward; it's going to be slamming forward.  There's going to be no time for it to get out of the tank in any meaningful way.

Agree ref payloads, etc.

Vin

Wrong, I've seen it happen, it bursts out of the lid big time.

[Paul Coleman]

My 1000L IBC is stuck down with blu-tac.

That's dangerous.  Use Gardiner's epoxy resin.

[Perfect Windows]

Wrong, I've seen it happen, it bursts out of the lid big time.

"Wrong"?

I was talking about something completely different from what you were posting about.  You were posting about some of the water coming out of a Brodex tank.  I was posting about a deliberate puncture at the front of a tank.

I've just remembered why I try not to comment on this subject.  I shouldn't have posted in the first place; it's too emotive.

Vin

[♠Winp®oClean♠]

Wrong, I've seen it happen, it bursts out of the lid big time.

"Wrong"?

I was talking about something completely different from what you were posting about.  You were posting about some of the water coming out of a Brodex tank.  I was posting about a deliberate puncture at the front of a tank.

I've just remembered why I try not to comment on this subject.  I shouldn't have posted in the first place; it's too emotive.

Vin

The puncture concept would work IMO. If you don't want to post, goodbye.