[Redcaddy]

I don't think it is a rebound.

I've looked closely and as it says on the annotations it is a reverse acceleration test.

One of my systems is a Brodex and I've never had any concerns about it's safety but what does concern me is that this is really just an advertising gimmick without quantifiable information such as speed on impact, load in tank. For all we know the test was carried out at 5 mph. I can see the point of the reverse acceleration test as it will simulate a rear end shunt but again no real info is supplied.

Dan

A reverse acceleration test would simulate a head on collision...

The tank is heaved forwards as the van is yanked backwards with considerable force...

Same as going forwards then stopping suddenly.

[D B Services]

I don't think it is a rebound.

I've looked closely and as it says on the annotations it is a reverse acceleration test.

One of my systems is a Brodex and I've never had any concerns about it's safety but what does concern me is that this is really just an advertising gimmick without quantifiable information such as speed on impact, load in tank. For all we know the test was carried out at 5 mph. I can see the point of the reverse acceleration test as it will simulate a rear end shunt but again no real info is supplied.

Dan

A reverse acceleration test would simulate a head on collision...

The tank is heaved forwards as the van is yanked backwards with considerable force...

Same as going forwards then stopping suddenly.

Back to school for me!

Yes you are correct.


Dan

[Moderator David@stives]

I think Brodex should be Applauded for giving us more choice in the crash tested systems.

Well done Brodex

Dave

[twt]

In the real World
YES head on at 50mph
want to see the photographs?

yes please that would be very interesting.

[dave0123]

In the real World
YES head on at 50mph
want to see the photographs?

I would be intrested in seing them too! 

[alanwilson]

glyn you posted the pics before - sorry but 50mph head on? I don't think so - the van would be completely totalled and the pics you posted the van wasn't completely wrecked.

[Glyn H]

Alan
I can only take the drivers word for the actual speed, they were traveling in the fast lane of a dual carrageway when a car comming in the opposite direction and lost control and crossed into their carrageway. The van was of course a total write off as was the car that hit it.
If you dont believe the drivers statement thats your perogative.
Both vehicles are shown

[Window Washers]

glyn you posted the pics before - sorry but 50mph head on? I don't think so - the van would be completely totalled and the pics you posted the van wasn't completely wrecked.

I dont recon they are driving to far in them now.

What a gutter brand new van as well.

[Moderator David@stives]

Glyn

Do you know whats happened to Paul C and the Powerclene franchisee's ?

[[GQC] Tim]

Wow that looks terrible. 

No pictures of the tank etc?

[Glyn H]

David
Paul is no longer running the franchise. The franchises still continue to trade and we deal with them on an individual basis now.
Dont know any more details.
Glyn

[sageorgeta]

Read about him on the other forum.....i dont think his franchisees are at all happy.

[alanwilson]

Glyn - notice how the front member is untouched, there are no signs of deformation around it at all (the front member is the bar leading up to the bumper) - at 50mph there would be no front member, no bonnet, no windscreen, nothing.

the other vehicles damage is not important as it has crossed the central reservation (wiping out anything there) and for all we know it may have hit another vehicle/crash barrier before or after impacting the van.

Note also that the accident clearly wasn't head on - only the extreme front drivers side is damaged which leads me to believe the accident was more of a glance, I know there is a fair bit of damage but certainly wasn't a head on as you stated.

The reason why the van is written off is most likely due to the twisting of the chassis which is very expensive to repair and in this case, ultimately not worth it when considered with the superficial damage the van has sustained.

So to recap - 50mph head on, not a chance, the car has glanced off the front drivers corner of the van and the bulk of the damage caused to the car wasn't caused by the van.

Nasty enough looking though and the restraint system of the tank would certainly have been subject to quite a severe moment of inertia (the tendency for an object to continue to move forward).

[[GQC] Tim]

50mph is the last time they would have looked at the speedo, after that they would break, even if they would have have mere seconds till impact, if you slam on the brakes, depending on the situation, it would be more like 35-40 at the very best. Try slamming your brakes at 50, you'd be surprised how quickly you get to 30.

[Moderator David@stives]

#It was still a nasty collision no matter what sppeed, and the tank was still intact, why split hairs

[Mr H]

Going by all the "errors" that ionics print, such as longest and lightest pole in the world and other statements, I would have greater trust in a system installed by Glyn than one installed by Ionics, even if Glyn knew it was for me..... !!!! 

Regards
Mr H

[[GQC] Tim]

#It was still a nasty collision no matter what sppeed, and the tank was still intact, why split hairs

Because it's a matter of life and death! Rather splitting hairs then splitting my skull.

How do you know the tank is intact? No pictures of the tank or tank mountings?

[Brodex]

Sorry guys, we should have made it clear that the crash test was carried out at 31-34mph (as recommend by the European Frontal Crash Directive 96/79/EC). We've slowed it down so that you can see what's happening

We took MIRA's advice on the testing (internationally-acclaimed Ministry of Defence testing site). They're famous for testing Formula 1 cars, so of course they were the obvious choice when it came to testing... a Transit Van full of Pure Water! Reverse Acceleration is the recognised simulation for a head-on collision. The static van, mounted on rails, is hit by a ram and forced backwards... admittedly it looks misleading and a little undramatic, but then we're not making a Schwarzenneger movie, here! It's a scientific experiment, with your safety in mind. We had to be guided by MIRA. Head-on into a wall may look more impressive, but that is allowing the crumple-zone of the van to absorb half the energy. "Reverse Acceleration" is a direct test of the absolute integrity of the van and its mount - taking the full brunt of the impact!

Very impressive. Well done Brodex. My only concern is the flying tank lid which could easily decapitate someone.

Don't worry, Alex, the lid flying off isn't going to decapitate you. It weighs 850 grammes! It might give you a nasty bruise or a headache, but then you've just met 17-year-old Dwayne, head-on, in his lowered Saxo GTi, on the wrong side of the road!... so you've probably already got one of those! And that, with the unexpected shower, is surely better than getting hit in the small of the back by a half-tonne tank!

Cheers,
Daniel

[Alex Gardiner]

Very impressive. Well done Brodex. My only concern is the flying tank lid which could easily decapitate someone.

Don't worry, Alex, the lid flying off isn't going to decapitate you. It weighs 850 grammes! It might give you a nasty bruise or a headache, but then you've just met 17-year-old Dwayne, head-on, in his lowered Saxo GTi, on the wrong side of the road!... so you've probably already got one of those! And that, with the unexpected shower, is surely better than getting hit in the small of the back by a half-tonne tank!

Cheers,
Daniel

Congratulations on a well carried out test.  The problem with the lid isn't it's stationery weight, more the fact that at speed it has a relatively sharp edge and could inflict more than just a bruise.  However, most people have bulkheads anyway so it's probably academic.

[Moderator David@stives]

I reckon the lid dould be tethered to the side of the tank with a small chain or strap.

Perhaps there is a market for lid restraint brackets