PDA

View Full Version : Non-NFPA 52 conforming pictures



Highmarker
11-25-2008, 02:00 PM
A note from Forum Staff:
Everyone involved with the conversion and maintenance of natural gas vehicles must become familiar with the National Fire Protection Association code #52, which provides standards for safe installation and service. The code can be purchased here (http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/AboutTheCodes.asp?DocNum=52&cookie_test=1), but in the mean time Texas has a code which closely mirrors NFPA-52 and is attached to this top post for free download. Please read this stuff before turning a wrench on 3600 psi systems! NGV's have a wonderful safety track record. Let's keep it this way.
-----------------------------------------

Post pictures you've seen (in person or on the internet) of conversions that are NOT conforming to NFPA-52. Hopefully this thread will alert NGV owners on what not to do and on what to be on the look out for when pulling into refuel.

Here's a vehicle on found for sale on craigslist.
http://picasaweb.google.com/blebly1/CNGFordExpedition?authkey=q3dnXaZamH0#

This Ford Expedition has 10 one GGE tanks manifolded together using RUBBER tubing!:eek: I would run away as fast as I can if I saw this vehicle filling up.

jetboatjohnny
11-25-2008, 02:23 PM
Car comes complete with Texas vehicle inspection sticker!
Here's the AD http://dallas.craigslist.org/ndf/ctd/914007118.html

Franz
11-25-2008, 03:06 PM
Oh-------my-------------gosh!

I gave up on how many violations I counted. It appears that each cylinder does not have a shut off valve. I cannot see enough of the cylinder mounting straps but what I do see are insufficenet. The fueling connector is inside the passenger compartment along with the pressure gauge, the regulator is under the box (WHAT?), flexible high pressure hoses (I cannot see if they are rated for CNG use), and so on. The box certainly is not vapor tight with a seal and I dont see any floor vents.

Galileo is not approved for Texas use, this looks like a case of "lets try it and see if it works" or a test case for the popular TV show, "CNG installers gone wild!". In Texas, the safety inspectors are not trained to identify code compliance, that falls to other regulatory agencies. One thing is there is no road use tax sticker on the lower right corner of the windshield. Either the inspector was not aware of the CNG system or it was put on after the inspection. Any way, its an illegal installation, period.

As for the statement that it runs great, I dont see how with the regulator mounted 15 feet away from the throttle inlet, the transit delay must be horrendous. Oh, it looks like there are TWO regualtors, back to back. Doesnt change my opinion, plus the blue support boxes under the hood clash with the black paint.

Arghhh!

Franz

John Mitton
11-25-2008, 03:25 PM
Any guess as to how many seconds its gonna take for the Texas RR Commission to get on this one? :D

afvman
11-25-2008, 03:37 PM
Franz is the MAN...

Don't forget no vent lines, PRD's? 1/4 turn shut-off...how many is that now?

But I like the carpeting over the plywood, nice touch.

afvman

Lancer Automotive Group
11-25-2008, 03:53 PM
Is anything wrong with this one?

karlhafen
11-25-2008, 05:30 PM
Is anything wrong with this one?

Is that the dual tank package for your f-250 ?------------JK :)

Kevin Fern
11-25-2008, 05:45 PM
Good Lord, what is that? They should have stayed cooking hamburgers and not converting cars!

larrycng
11-25-2008, 05:54 PM
What about the "additional check valve between the fuel connector and the cylinders?

I still have a question about the high pressure line; non- stainless steel with the white plastic converning? I've seen nothing that requires stainless.

How was that long low pressure line routed? I heard of one vehicle with the High Pressure line routed in side the vehicle under the carpets.

Larrycng

larrycng
11-25-2008, 07:42 PM
Here is a more common story

Inside a Bronco from the mid-west. The story was "I'm not finished yet" I hope it has been made safe and compliant.

Larrycng

rgliedt
11-25-2008, 10:44 PM
This looks like a vehicle I want for my ex-wife. No ratchet straps on that
tank, no sir that is real plumber tape with custom made anti-roll blocks created by one of natures finest trees. Looks like the needle on the stupid meter went around twice and fell off.

Franz
11-26-2008, 07:38 AM
Any guess as to how many seconds its gonna take for the Texas RR Commission to get on this one? :D

They "already" know about it.

Franz

afvman
11-26-2008, 08:34 AM
Here's another...before everyone gets upset, it was taken in Bangladesh...

Home made brackets

No isolation gaskets

8X the wgt of the cyls in the six principle directions

and on, and on...


afvman

Highmarker
12-15-2008, 12:12 PM
This is a classic non-NFPA boo boo. The filling nozzle (connection) is inside the trunk:eek:. This is also a non-EPA vehicle - a Honda Accord. I have seen this type of boo boo in a variety of different vehicles ranging from an Oldsmobile Alero to SUVs. This lady also has her groceries from the store in there.

afvman
12-15-2008, 01:50 PM
Hello Highmaker,

This one caught my attention. Obviously, it's NOT a factory installation, but..

even though it wouldn't be my choice to mount the fill receptacle inside the trunk, I don't find anything in NFPA-52, 2006 that says you CAN'T. What's your read?

That having been said, my guess is that it wouldn't pass another requirement in the same section (6.9), namely that any fill receptacle must be able to withstand a 150lb breakaway force since that's what's required for the fill hose. Can't see it in the picture, but if it's a homemade install I'd doubt it.

B/R,

afvman

Highmarker
12-15-2008, 03:01 PM
Larrycng brought this to my attention, but doesn't section 6.4 on venting systems state that all connections need to be in a gas tight enclosure? I would assume that the filling receptacle would fall under that section. Any how, it is common sense that one of the most common places for natural gas to leak is through the filling receptacle. I would never have a filling nozzle in an inclosed area, especially where people are (i.e. back of the SUV, trunk, even the engine compartment is dangerous).

afvman
12-15-2008, 03:29 PM
High Jared,

Well, that's probably as close as we'll get. Although it's intended primarily for PRD's and cylinders, it DOES say 'connections between pressure-carrying components...' I'd say a fill receptacle would qualify.

You're right. Besides it just doesn't meet the stupid meter.

afvman

CNG Utah
12-15-2008, 03:33 PM
This is going to be a fun thread to follow. I remember seeing that first Expedition on CL and thinking we could pass on that one.

Kevin Fern
12-15-2008, 06:15 PM
I always refer back to the NFPA 52 1992 edition. There was alot more about tubing, venting and other things that the newer editions don't make mention of. For folks who want to get into this business, I would say, buy the 1992 version and start from there! We all should know that, this high of pressure, is nothing to play around with!! I've built 5000 psi Hydrogen systems before and the same rules apply, safety first and only safety first (not profit).

Highmarker
12-18-2008, 02:35 PM
Here is another one. This one is listed on ksl.com

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=443&sid=&tab=list/view&ad=1009465

And also listed on Craigslist Salt Lake City

http://saltlakecity.craigslist.org/cto/961555303.html

The picture that I have shown here is of the tank underneath. Look how close it is to the ground!:eek:

Is there anything in NFPA 52 regarding location of tanks or ground clearance?

afvman
12-18-2008, 03:24 PM
Hey Jared,

Well, let's see how many violations we can find on this one! I count 3 obvious ones:
1. the rubber gasket between the bracket and cylinder is too short
2. you're right! ground clearance. Can't be the lowest point of the undercarrage and MUST be 7in. min. for a wheelbase < or = 127" (9in. for > 127").
3. no 'stone shield'

There may be more...I'd like to have a closer look at the cylinder valve and PRD vent line inside the passenger compartment.

Good work. I wonder what should be the next steps?

afvman

CNG Utah
12-18-2008, 03:40 PM
For some reason, the picture of this tank makes me feel a little un-easy. This is from a car on KSL right now. The guys website says he can convert just about anything.

Highmarker
12-18-2008, 04:06 PM
For some reason, the picture of this tank makes me feel a little un-easy. This is from a car on KSL right now. The guys website says he can convert just about anything.

Is that the Acura from Liberty Auto in Kaysville?

I am NEVER going to fill up next to a vehicle that I know is not EPA/NFPA-52 certified.

Kevin Fern
12-18-2008, 05:51 PM
I sure would be interested in knowing how that excursion got CARB certified, looks like a accident waiting for a place to happen!!

Kevin Fern
12-18-2008, 05:54 PM
Jared, ground clearance is between 7 and 9 inches depending on wheelbase, that is loaded to capacity ground clearance!

afvman
12-18-2008, 06:08 PM
Kevin, et al,

...and that's with the tires deflated! See 6.3.3.5 ('06 version)

Looks to me like there's an abrasion on the dome already!

Be afraid, be very afraid.

afvman

cowboy
12-18-2008, 06:56 PM
it has a hit mark already on the dome look at the scrach behind the impact mark must have hit something laying in the road I am against most regulation but things like this make me think that we might need some here or more enforcement and for me to think that it is bad this is the worst install I have ever seen and we are back to can you spell bomb I have some soda straws and duct tape if they want to up grade cowboy

cowboy
12-18-2008, 07:21 PM
this guy I would guess has no clue he has a phone # I am going to call him some of you might want to do the same760-241-8667

mattamhop
12-18-2008, 07:36 PM
this guy I would guess has no clue he has a phone # I am going to call him some of you might want to do the same760-241-8667
I'm not nearly as tech savy as those responding so far, but I am enjoying the thread. Question about the guy whose number is above. If he sells the thing and it blows (and does all manner of nasty things to some folks bodies) is he liable? If so, and if the problems could be fixed by someone in the know, this might be a great buy once he learns that his life could change (possibly criminally) if he lets it out of his hands as is and it goes bad. I might be interested in buying it if one of you tech types can make it right and pick it up for a song just to save that guys skin.

cnghal
12-18-2008, 08:10 PM
Jared,
Bro, this has got to be especially disturbing and disheartening to you, work all day designing and building safe components and see this garbage on your way home.
And they call Arizona the "Wild West"? It's looking pretty scary round your parts. Waiting to hopefully only hear about an incedent, can't really call them accidents when these jackasses are doing this deliberatly.
Maybe it's time to call in the marshalls(FBI) and round up the domestic terrorist bomb builders and give them a free trip to Cuba.
Sorry to say, but I think it's going to take an injury or death of a leader of the LDS or their family before anyone with power really sinks their teeth into this problem in Utah. It's clear the government doesn't have the power or motivation to do it.

cowboy
12-18-2008, 08:49 PM
Im back he is a nice guy aint got a clue it would not hurt for some of you to give him a call I think he should sue the installer for damages and puntive damages as the installer who did the change over cared less about the lives of him and his kin and everyone who was on the road near him I dont live out there but I am sure some of you could find him a expert witness he could easly win a suit I am not one for sueing but who ever put this on needs to be stoped again his#is760-241-8667 be nice he is just someone who got the big screwing goverment regs wont stop this but a big ol suit might just my thoughts so give him a call guys


Jared,
Bro, this has got to be especially disturbing and disheartening to you, work all day designing and building safe components and see this garbage on your way home.
And they call Arizona the "Wild West"? It's looking pretty scary round your parts. Waiting to hopefully only hear about an incedent, can't really call them accidents when these jackasses are doing this deliberatly.
Maybe it's time to call in the marshalls(FBI) and round up the domestic terrorist bomb builders and give them a free trip to Cuba.
Sorry to say, but I think it's going to take an injury or death of a leader of the LDS or their family before anyone with power really sinks their teeth into this problem in Utah. It's clear the government doesn't have the power or motivation to do it. this guy lives in cal so help him out he is your nabour so all of you who talk the talk about safety walk the walk and help this guy out he is just a poor smuck who got it put to him by a crook


I'm not nearly as tech savy as those responding so far, but I am enjoying the thread. Question about the guy whose number is above. If he sells the thing and it blows (and does all manner of nasty things to some folks bodies) is he liable? If so, and if the problems could be fixed by someone in the know, this might be a great buy once he learns that his life could change (possibly criminally) if he lets it out of his hands as is and it goes bad. I might be interested in buying it if one of you tech types can make it right and pick it up for a song just to save that guys skin. it would take a lot I dont see much that is done right cowboy

larrycng
12-18-2008, 09:28 PM
He won't be selling the vehicle in California unless he finds a dumb or less than honest SMOG shop and/technician. Some other state will get stuck with it. If the smog tech doing the next test doing his job, he will fail the vehicle for either "Tampering" of Modifications. If the smog tech is a little slow, he will send it to the referee and the ref will fail it.

I checked the SMOG test history on the vehicle and it is a little strange. the vehicle was tested in 5/04 and passed. It was then tested again in 8/07 which is a little too long between tests (2 year requirement). Then the vehicle was tested in May of 08 just before it was converted. All test were passing and appear to be done in the San Diego area.

The guy has about 18 months to unload the vehicle out of state, before it has to be smogged again. I'll check this one again in a couple of weeks just for fun.

Oh yes it does need some re-working. The neck of that cylinder was not designed to hose clamp one end of a vapor bag; it done all the time and as long as it can hold some pressure ...

Below is the a BAR site to check a vehicles smog test history; any one can do it.

vehiclehttp://www.bar.ca.gov/applications/VehTests/PubTstQry.aspx

Larrycng

bretlott
12-21-2008, 01:39 AM
Can someone start posting some pictures of non EPA installations that are (reference to illegal kit removed) good quality installations? I have seen some Awesome looking installations out there. I filled up next to a 1985 Chevy truck yesterday with a really sweet set up. He said it was done in California by (reference to illegal shop removed), in 2006 by an employee of a shop that does many of the EPA installations for government fleet vehicles.
Totally sweat ride. I have no problem with this type of vehicle filling up next to me. I just wish they would let these non EPA conversions go as long as they could pass a state safety inspection; with someone as smart as Jared doing the inspections.

rocketmanpete
12-21-2008, 03:46 PM
the one car install, I like the metal strapping must have a 150# burst rating. So this is why I am afraid of non compliant installs.

From the UHP coming in 2009,

I agree that all vehicles that are being manufactured or converted to an alternative fuel should have an inspection conducted to ensure their safety and the safety of others around it. We have prepared some specific criteria related to 'Alternative Fuel Conversions' that will be placed into our new safety inspection manual for 2009. We feel that this new criteria will assist in removing the unsafe conversions that are currently out there. I really appreciate that you also took the time to bring up your concern with me, as many others have also done so. If you have any further questions, please feel free to let me know.

Respectfully,



Sergeant Joe Vasquez
Vehicle Safety Section
5500 West Amelia Earhart Drive, Suite 360
Salt Lake City, Utah 84117
Office: (801) 965-4889
Fax: (801) 322-1817

cowboy
12-21-2008, 05:59 PM
ok it has been 2 days how many of you guys out there on the shakey side took the time to call this guy and at least help him get the tank aka bomb off the bottom of excursion low altude bomber and stop the nit wit that put this on

paulr5s
12-22-2008, 11:29 PM
What about this Nissan XTerra I spotted see any NFPA 52 violations?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3198/2915560781_89a6e6ace1_d.jpg


A blog dedicated to the vehicle.
http://ngvdriver.com/?cat=13

A few photos
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chadnuesmeyer/2916404752/

Adrian
12-22-2008, 11:54 PM
What about this Nissan XTerra I spotted see any NFPA 52 violations?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3198/2915560781_89a6e6ace1_d.jpg


A blog dedicated to the vehicle.
http://ngvdriver.com/?cat=13

A few photos
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chadnuesmeyer/2916404752/

I'm in no way an expert...but aren't you supposed to bag the tank on the valve end to ensure no leaking occurs from possible loose fittings when installed inside the passenger compartment?

I'm working on installing an extra tank in my Civic GX, and even though it's in the trunk, it still has to be bagged.

bretlott
12-23-2008, 09:16 AM
Great pics. Nice tank and brackets, Looks like they done a good install however, there are issues with this tank not being bagged, or properly vented. Hope he sees this and then improves on his set up.

larrycng
12-23-2008, 09:35 AM
You are correct Adrian, it needs a vapor bag or gas tight enclosure - when the job is completed. If you notice there are no high pressure lines attached to the tank or is there a PRD vent line.

If you look at the other pictures on flicker there is no rubber insulator (resiliant gasket) between the tank and the bracket which is a violation of NFPA 52.

Someone need to loan this guy an copy of NFPA 52. I would like to see if he used the squard washers that came with the tank bracket kit?

Larrycng

rocketmanpete
12-23-2008, 09:51 PM
Hey Jared I saw a black Accord at the Wilson st station just a week be for turkey day late model with the filler in the trunk also. I also saw in Salt Lake County on I-15 on the same day two different older Caravans with a CNG tank mounted under the back end real close to the ground. I will be more alert from now on.

CNG Utah
12-24-2008, 12:45 AM
The older (94-96) Dodge Caravans are actually OEM dedicated NGVs. We've sold about four of them in the past. They're pretty nice for a minivan. The range on stock tanks is only about 100 miles but most of them have an extra tank behind the rear seats.

josch
12-29-2008, 04:24 PM
Here is a more common story

Inside a Bronco from the mid-west. The story was "I'm not finished yet" I hope it has been made safe and compliant.

Larrycng

Yeah, I think I remember that guy saying that he installed an ejection seat like in a fighter jet in case he blows his PRD he can get out fast:)

Highmarker
01-12-2009, 09:11 AM
This picture is of a 1975 Corvette. Here is the link:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=443&sid=&tab=list/view&ad=929668

It has been on KSL for some time. It appears to be a Type I tank, but its the tie down "brackets" that scare me. Due to the age of the vehicle, it is not governed by any EPA CNG conversion regulations (just has to pass the emissions tests - sniffer). The conversion is clearly in violation of NFPA 52.

larrycng
01-12-2009, 01:33 PM
Highmarker;

Nice picture. Did you notice if there was and insulating rubber between the strap and tank?

The vehicle may be too old for EPA, but the NFPA 52 goes by when the vehicle was converted.

I'm going to hang around a CNG station one of these days real soon. I'm real interested in seeing what comes through.

The picture reminds me why teach cylinder inspection classes.

Larrycng

afvman
01-12-2009, 02:58 PM
Everyone,

The requirment is pretty straight forward. The cylinder mounting system has to be able to withstand a force of 8x the weight of the cylinder (full) applied in any of six directions and not move more than one-half inch. Would these?

And,...8x is not that much in the event of a collision. In Canada the standard is 20x which is closer to what you could expect in a head-on.

The point being, you don't want a cylinder flying around loose in any event. You should see them fly when a valve lets go!

afvman

Franz
01-12-2009, 09:01 PM
The fill connection is fastened to a sheet metal bracket, that is mounted with sheet metal screws, to a fiberglass AC evaporator core box. That is REALLY CLEVER! Boy, that took a lot of engineering!

The fuel line does not appear to be the proper type either, and the connectors are probably off-shore single ferrule types too, and most likely steel, not SS.

From this angle, it LOOKS like the regulator is mounted to the engine while the fill connection is to the body, maybe not. Oops.

Franz

larrycng
01-13-2009, 06:05 AM
Looking at the other pictures of the Vet, it come under EPA regulations. Federal (non-Calif) vehicles first started with exhaust emission in 1968 MY.

That must be the model with "reinforced " evap case built to withstand the 150 lb break-away force. From what I can see, there is no "additional check valve" in the fueling line

I believe that there should be at a stress loop between the fill connector and the regulator -- maybe a flex line in case the motor mount breaks when he is backing up in a hurry?

Maybe they ought to start over with this one????

Larrycng

Luke
01-30-2009, 05:29 PM
Does the attached tanks installation meet NFPA 52?

I do not have a copy of NFPA-52 and am not a certified CNG technician or inspector.

cngacrossusa
01-30-2009, 05:55 PM
Wow, the Vette is another example of "Plumbers Tape" being used as straps for cng tank . . . . super scary!!! Obviously they need to be actual brackets designed for the tank.

Any rear-end accident with this Vette would not only crush the fiberglass Vette body, but also send a cng tank projectile into the back of both humans sitting in the seats!!

larrycng
01-30-2009, 06:04 PM
From what I see NO. I would like to see more pictures. The big things that is most obvious is that there are no guards or shields. It looks as if it won't pass minimum road clearance (unless it has bigger that 18 inch wheels), needs to have 9" of clearance with the tires deflated.

NEXT

Larrycng

CraziFuzzy
01-31-2009, 03:56 AM
Does the attached tanks installation meet NFPA 52?

I do not have a copy of NFPA-52 and am not a certified CNG technician or inspector.

The only shortcoming that is apparent in that picture is the lack of a rock guard. There really should be sheet metal attached to the bottom of the frame to prevent road debris from striking the tanks. Other than that, the ground clearance seems plenty, but can't see a lot of other details.

larrycng
01-31-2009, 07:52 AM
Hey Crazy, check the relation between the axle, wheel/tire and the bottom of the tank rack. The bottom of the tank rack is below the axle and below the centerline of the wheel. With that in mind, NFPA 52 "sez" that you need a minimum of 9" road clearance (vehicle is probably over 127" WB). "52" goes on to say that it should be measured with tires deflated -- it will be close. Just a bit of relational analysis.

From what I see, not a bad job on the tank rack, except for the shields

Larrycng

cnghal
01-31-2009, 07:53 PM
Does the attached tanks installation meet NFPA 52?

I do not have a copy of NFPA-52 and am not a certified CNG technician or inspector.

Well, from my first observation, I'm guessing NFPA-52 is a mute point.
From the color of the tanks and that it is in Utah, I'm guessing they're non-NGV-2 tanks, probably Chinese.
Game Over!

CraziFuzzy
02-01-2009, 01:31 AM
Hey Crazy, check the relation between the axle, wheel/tire and the bottom of the tank rack. The bottom of the tank rack is below the axle and below the centerline of the wheel. With that in mind, NFPA 52 "sez" that you need a minimum of 9" road clearance (vehicle is probably over 127" WB). "52" goes on to say that it should be measured with tires deflated -- it will be close. Just a bit of relational analysis.

From what I see, not a bad job on the tank rack, except for the shields

Larrycng

Yeah, guess that's true.. It's hard to judge the height without and decent sizing reference, and a slight offset angle on the photo.

Franz
02-01-2009, 08:18 AM
Also, they are not mounted transversely. (5.3.12) I dont think the exception applies here.

They dont follow a logical departure angle guide either. This is a judgment call by a DOT inspector, and one I would make as well.

Franz

clnbrnr1
02-01-2009, 11:37 AM
On my factory installed dedicated 2000 Ford f-150 7700 the tank under the bed is steel wraped with fiber and the steel portion is painted blue, while the two tanks in the bed seem to be the same size and are painted black. The bedtanks are made in Italy. Does the blue color signify anything special? Thanks Joe.

cnghal
02-01-2009, 11:44 AM
Joe,
Blue and Black are standard Faber (Italian) colors on type 1 and 2 tanks.

larrycng
02-01-2009, 02:38 PM
They could also be some retrofit Dura Steel tanks. I believe SCI is the manufacturer. Check for signs of rust at the junction of the overwrap and steel liner

Larrycng

jmmcintyre
02-16-2009, 07:31 PM
I am the owner of the Tahoe with the yellow tanks pictured in this thread. I believe the photo came from Mr. Gephardt's report. The picture is not great. The tanks are DOT certified type one tanks. There is a metal shield that covers where the valves are located. At the time when I installed the tanks I think NFPA 52 did not require a shield for a type one tank. The appropriate insulators between the tank and the tank bracket are in place. The cage was built to give the tanks extra protection in the event of an accident. The departure angle did change, I had the springs worked to make the ride height the same as pre-conversion. when I tested the height with a trailer attached I did not have any problems, it even slipped of the end of a boat ramp and did not scrape. I was particularly careful to ensure the vehicle complied with every standard I could find because it is the test vehicle for the tax credit litigation, and the only issue I was interested in litigating was the EPA cert issue.

Luke
02-16-2009, 08:41 PM
Jack,

Good to see you on the forum. I have only owned OEM CNG vehicles, so I am a little biased. I have been a proponent for basing Utah state safety inspections entirely on the revision of NFPA-52 that was current when OEM install (or aftermarket conversion) occurs. See http://www.cngchat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=22964&postcount=12

Luke

snakeskinner
03-01-2009, 05:53 PM
From what I've seen so-far, most of the OEM CNG vehicles don't meet NFPA 52 completely. For instance, the Ford Crown Victoria's have the PRD vented into the wheel-well. If you look hard enough, they rarely meet everything. Of course the OEM has a TON more money to put in people's pockets to get things by..

The trend I've been seeing on some of the trucks coming into our shop is that nobody seems to see a need to hook anything to the PRD at all.... We have a local company that had been purchasing some different vehicles to test out before they purchased a complete fleet of vehicles. 2-Ford pickups with I believe Baytech systems (may be wrong) and a Silverado with an Impco system were all purchased prior to our shop getting trained and licensed to do the conversions.

Since then, we have re-done all 3 trucks to meet NFPA 52 and Oklahoma State reg's. One Ford had a camper shell and the other had a hard bed-cover. Both were converted at the same shop. Neither had any decals other than a CNG diamond on the rear and the manufacturer decal under the hood. No label with system specs, no shut-off valve labels, nothing. Both tanks were in contact with the front edge of the bed, both had the PRD fitting with plastic cap still in place and no vapor bag. They also had the fill-valves inside the bed with the tank. We relocated the fill valves to the exterior, relocated the tank for clearance, re-plumbed the system and installed a vapor bag, added a Coelescing filter (necessary in Oklahoma), and all labels.

the Silverado was converted somewhere out in Arizona or Utah (I forget). The tank-cover was a diamond-treadplate design and when removed, it had been rubbing on the tank and created several Level-1 abrasions. Again, PRD plastic cap was still in place. This was at least in an open-bed but the company still requested we install a vapor-bag with external fill-valve in case it gets a cover later down the road. This one at least had the shut-off valve decal but still was missing any system spec decals.

This seems to be a severe problem in the CNG market and I can see this causing a lot of hang-ups for CNG to really become the fore-front. The only way I see this being rectified is to have a more stringent policing agency in each state. As it stands, there is only one person in the whole state of Oklahoma that has anything to do with alternative fuels. Hopefully with the CNG market starting to boom in Oklahoma, they can hire more people and actually go out and inspect some of the work being done...

I know everything we put out is above and beyond NFPA-52 and Oklahoma State regulations because I inspect every truck before it leaves our facility.

Kyle

cowboy
03-04-2009, 04:54 PM
I aint knocking your work but to be 100% all the time would be hard as many regulations as there are I just found my dodge van prd on the tank in side went to a blind hole in the floor to the stamped box uni frame where it would come back up through the seat bolt holes when the seats are out and this was stock it is on the line build sheet I only found this as I pulled the tank and did not see light down there 2 inchs right or left it would be fine have a great day:)

rocketmanpete
03-25-2009, 11:06 PM
It my recent visits to Kicks 66 Copper hills WJ I noticed these two. A bright yellow early 2-K Dodge Quad cab 4X4 nice saddle tank under passenger side of cab. Tank well exposed painted bright yellow no crash shield or gravel guard. Also a early 2-K Toy Tacoma extra cab 4X4 brown I think. Tank was loaded in bed no straps just end cap mounts bolted to the bed and no uv shield. I took pictures of this one but it cold and raining pictures no good. Plate was a UT ham radio tag.

freedml
03-26-2009, 03:56 AM
With all these bad installations running around it's amazing we don't have more accidents/explosions.

larrycng
03-26-2009, 09:13 AM
The only question I have, is were the tanks designed for end (neck) mounts. If the end/neck is extended and is about 3" long as has machined surfaces with plastic sleves between the mounting blocks and neck, then it is probably ok. Dynetek is the only one I can think of that uses neck mounts,

Hope this helps

Larrycng

CNG Utah
03-26-2009, 09:32 AM
Speaking of unsafe conversions, I just saw a truck on ebay this morning with an interesting way of mounting the extra tank.

http://i42.tinypic.com/iml6gw.jpg

Sadly it's not the first time I've seen a tank mounted in the bed of a pickup with tie-down straps.

karlhafen
03-26-2009, 10:57 AM
Speaking of unsafe conversions, I just saw a truck on ebay this morning with an interesting way of mounting the extra tank.

http://i42.tinypic.com/iml6gw.jpg

Sadly it's not the first time I've seen a tank mounted in the bed of a pickup with tie-down straps.

Please do not tell me it is hooked up with a piece of hydraulic hose and a ball valve from Ace hardware.

Highmarker
03-27-2009, 07:21 AM
Speaking of unsafe conversions, I just saw a truck on ebay this morning with an interesting way of mounting the extra tank.

http://i42.tinypic.com/iml6gw.jpg

Sadly it's not the first time I've seen a tank mounted in the bed of a pickup with tie-down straps.

Here is the link to the ebay site:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevrolet-C-K-Pickup-2500-Crew-Cab-2004-CNG-Bi-Fuel-4X4_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQitemZ160324132177QQsspagenam eZRSSQ3aBQ3aSRCHQ3aUSQ3a101

It is located in Kansas.

rocketmanpete
03-28-2009, 10:47 AM
Toy Tacoma, the end caps looked like they were made for mounting, but should not the mount's been bolted to the frame and not the 18 gauge bed skin?

larrycng
03-28-2009, 07:30 PM
The frame would be nice. I would use some back plates about 8"X 8" (my personal opinion -- would have to check Mfg requirements). You do belly mounts on pick-up beds, with appropriate back up washers, why not end mounts?

Larrycng

live wire
03-29-2009, 08:42 AM
where can i get a copy of nfpa-52 ? after reading this thread i checked all of my cng fleet one ford has no prd at all! All of this is factory stuff truck was purchased from So cal gas co. must have been removed by a mech. who works for a gas co! dont worry truck is benched till repaired .got a line on prd ?thank you all.

larrycng
03-29-2009, 12:33 PM
The industry and public and I appreciate those who want to learn the safety aspects of CNG. THANKS!

As for NFPA 52, contact www.nfpa.org they are about $40 to $50 if I remember correctly.

On your Ford with no PRD, Dedicated Fords with electronic valves, the PRD is in the valve. Be careful, those valves can be purchased from the OEM with or without the PRD. Some bus manufacturers, that have tanks with remote PRD's use them, I believe New Flyer is one.

Hopes this helps

Larrycng

jblue
03-30-2009, 11:31 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotorsws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260384231940


The large cylinder in between the front seats is an additional CNG tank that we installed in the van.yeah .. that is where I would put one too but I would glue some cup-holders to it.

cnghal
03-30-2009, 11:57 PM
Hey John,
Good eye, I was talking to my bro about this at lunch.
Did you catch the same company selling the hightop handicap vans?
Those extra tanks are in the back next to the backseat. :eek:

http://www.cngchat.com/photopost/uploads/1312/Inside_HC_Van.jpg

Highmarker
03-31-2009, 09:15 AM
Here is a Suburban. One thing wrong here (possibly three).
1. Tie down straps used instead of metal brackets with rubber insulation.
2. The tanks look like "China" ones. Probably not DOT FMVSS 304 approved (nor NGV2).
3. It is hard to see if there is any "bagging" around the valves.

The picture was taken in Utah probably end of 2008.

CNGLO
03-31-2009, 01:33 PM
Can I suggest that when posting a non-conforming picture, we also post where and the date the picture was taken?

Highmarker
04-07-2009, 09:43 AM
I thought I would post this one. It is a Jeep from Maryland. See link below:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Jeep-Cherokee-1993-Jeep-Cherokee-CNG-REG-GAS-DUAL-TANKS_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQitemZ120400875931QQsspagen ameZRSSQ3aBQ3aSRCHQ3aUSQ3a101

This is a pretty good install: vent bagging and good brackets with rubber. However (and this is point I want to make), the brackets cover part of the label. The label must be visible and legible. Corrective action would be to loosen the tank brackets and slide the cylinder about 2 - 3 inches to the left and tighten the brackets back up.

Another thing I just noticed. You can see the date "1992" on the top tank. This might be the year it was manufactured. If it is, then the tank is most likely past it's expiration (15 years).

larrycng
04-07-2009, 04:17 PM
Not bad for a couple of out of date PSTs (Press Steel Tanks). You are correct as usual Highmarker, that is the mfg date. I may send the picture to a friend of mine who used to work for Press Steel as an engineer to see what he thinks. Nothing wrong with stacking the tanks, if it done right. Those tanks are heavy, I hope there are some good back up plates under the floor. Hope the vehicle is bi-fuel.

In truth, I've cut one of the tanks (10 years old with heavy UV damage) apart and it was perfect inside; no rust or anything. The DOT exemption (and I'll bet DOT-E) on those tanks, if I remember says 15 year life span. Good tank, but heavy

Larrycng

Franz
04-07-2009, 06:16 PM
Hmm, I agree with Larry, but if they are DOT spec cylinders, they are pre NGV-2 spec and only require 5 year inspections (the early cylinders required hydrostatic inspections, before the days of a formal visual inspection process) and if I recall, there was no end-of-life date.

If the data label info can be fully read, the straps can cover a small part of it. If the serial number, manufacturer info and production data can be read, its ok. The straps are not in the optimal position, the lower one is barely on the wrapping and a good portion of the label is covered. PST originally required strap placement on the 1/4 tank location points (in 1/4 of the tank length on each end. If the brackets are closer together, the tank can rock, and if they are too far apart, the center of the tank is unsupported. A strap should never be off of the wrapping on a type 2 tank.

One problem with stacking cylinders is that the arrangement must be triangulated. Not to difficult in the bed of a pickup but not that easy in the back of a vehicle like this one.

As a side note, many early PST and CNG brand cylinders were not consistent with label placement, they were placed on by hand during the wrapping process. I had one PST cylinder that had no neck where the valve screws in, it was never fully rolled in. A vapor bag would never have fit.

Franz

Highmarker
04-16-2009, 07:27 AM
What is wrong with this picture?

Give up...

The bolts that securely strap the cylinders to the brackets are missing!!:eek:

This picture is from a 2003 Ford F-150 for sale on ebay. See link below:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Ford-F-150-2-72-tanks-cng-dual-fuel-natural-gas-4x4-ford-type-4-tanks_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQitemZ250407873825QQsspagen ameZRSSQ3aBQ3aSRCHQ3aUSQ3a101

Added Note: This is NOT an OEM. This is an aftermarket conversion. You can see from the other pictures.

afvman
04-16-2009, 08:12 AM
Hey Jared,

"...8 cyl. conversion kit, not installed?" What's up with that?

My suggestion: buy the cylinders and forget the truck!

Caveat emptor!

afvman

cnghal
04-16-2009, 08:39 AM
Here's a good one, I'm surprised no one spotted this gem.
Reminds me of Washington DC: A classy and flashy facade up front, nothing but scary lawless ghetto behind.

Great advertising for a business, EPA and UHP take notice! :eek:

Ford - F-250 Lariat 4x4 Power Stroke Diesel Lariat TV DVD LIFT 20in Chromes CNG (http://cngchat.com/forum/Ford - F-250 Lariat 4x4 Power Stroke Diesel Lariat TV DVD LIFT 20in Chromes CNG)

http://www.cngchat.com/photopost/uploads/1312/Diesel-CNG.jpg

Highmarker
04-16-2009, 11:14 AM
Hal,

Is that gold part sitting next to the cylinder the HPR?:eek::eek::eek:

UHP or somebody needs to crack down on this stuff. Somebody IS GOING to lose their life in Utah. It's not a question of IF, it's a question of WHEN.

larrycng
04-16-2009, 01:17 PM
I wonder if that Mecco regulator has any freezing problems?

Is there a shield? I wonder what would happen if the guy missed when hooking up the goose neck trailer -- I bet the tank would really "goose" someone!

Larrycng

cnghal
04-16-2009, 01:21 PM
Larry,
My sentiments exactly.
Cover, shield, headache rack, something....anything!!!!!! :eek:

Highmarker
05-04-2009, 08:42 AM
Here is a tank on a 2004 Suzuki Grand Vitara for sale on KSL.com in Heber City, Utah.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=443&sid=&tab=list/view&ad=1261860

The four main things wrong here are:
1. No vent bagging around the valve and connections inside the vehicle.
2. High pressure tubing is not supported when going through the floor board.
3. Where is the PRD? If it is there underneath the valve, it is not properly vented to the outside using tubing.
4. I believe this tank is from China. I don't think it is DOT FMVSS 304 approved.

larrycng
05-04-2009, 09:23 AM
I've seen a couple of these tanks and valves Highmarker. The PRD appears to be built into the valve, but there is no room to connect a PRD vent line.

The tank I saw similar to the one pictured was made in China, but the label showed that it was ISO compliant, which is not accepted yet in this country. I also wonder if the label was put on at the factory with tanks build date or is it one of the labels that you fill in the date when you install the tank??

Personally. I think the rubber between the tank and strap should be moved so that the break in the rubber strap is at the space where the brackets come together.

Later
LarryCNG

Franz
05-04-2009, 02:48 PM
Also, no floor vent, and it appears that the fuel line is the European or Asian spec single ferrule fuel line, not the SS 304/316 required here, the same with the fitting.

I agree about the rubber isolater.

Franz

bretlott
05-05-2009, 12:02 AM
China or not I would drive that set up anyday. looks good to me. just bag and vent the tank outside the vehicle and shes good to go.

afvman
05-05-2009, 07:47 AM
...don't forget there's no CNG diamond on the rear of the vehicle to let the Emergency Responders know it's natural gas when that PRD let's go and fills up the interior of the vehicle!

There is a PRD on that valve, but I doubt that the Cv value would meet our requirements for venting a cylinder of that size. It's simply too small. But, other countries value life differently than we do.

...Everyone Goes Home Safe...

afvman

Highmarker
05-05-2009, 08:06 AM
China or not I would drive that set up anyday. looks good to me. just bag and vent the tank outside the vehicle and shes good to go.

As long as there is people that cut corners and disregard the safety requirements, CNG will always be an uphill battle.......Those who disregard safety are those that hurt other people more than themselves.

There is a reason why NFPA 52 has the requirements that it has. There is a reason why FMVSS 304 and NGV2 have the requirements that they have.

jblue
05-05-2009, 07:21 PM
As long as there is people that cut corners and disregard the safety requirements, CNG will always be an uphill battle.......Those who disregard safety are those that hurt other people more than themselves.I think the biggest problem is a lack of free and easy information.

I am a by-the-book type of person. I do it right or I do not do it. It is insanely frustrating that I cannot find any training materials for such things like correct pipe bending, correct method(s) for connecting fittings, correct tank installation.

Previous comments have mentioned various installs lacking vent bags and improper tubing mounting. Okay, so where is the information that talks about the correct methods for these types of things?

Do you want to educate yourself about NFPA 52. Ha. 40 bucks please (http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/AboutTheCodes.asp?DocNum=52&cookie_test=1).

Want to educate yourself about the NGV2 spec? Ha. A whopping $455.00 please. (http://www.shopcsa.ca/onlinestore/ISO_Search_Results.asp?query=ngv2&x=0&y=0)

:mad:

larrycng
05-05-2009, 10:22 PM
If you want tubing information, get the Swagelok Tube fitters Manual, from Swagelok. The last ones I bought were about $12 per.

For cylinder mounting there are the manufacturers mounting instructions. I have a powerpoint I use in class that covers the general aspects of cylinder mounting (information is from many sources)

Then there is CGA C 6.4 from the Compressed Gas Association for about $120. It covers cylinder inspection put has information that is applicable for installation.

There is a good general textbook on CNG vehicles that covers most everything that is out of print, It was put out by Delmar Publlishers, the name escapes me right now.

When all else fails follow the manufacturer's instructiions on specific components.

Larrycng

Franz
05-06-2009, 05:30 AM
But then, even though one knows that a cylinder is not legal for use, and the components used to install are not compliant, "it looks good to me, I would go ahead and drive it"!

Sometimes its not the lack of knowledge, its the desire to buck the system. For each person I teach who wants to do the job correctly, I have to fend off at least two people wanting to use non compliant equipment (plumbers strap for cylinder mounting, wooden cradles for CNG cylinders, brake line tubing, brass fittings, plumbers pipe, and the list goes on and on).

Oh well, "they look good to me". And we wonder why we have accidents.

$40.00 spent for NFPA 52 for one person doing one vehicle is just part of the job, plus spending $75.00 for a set of tubing benders, putting two more stainless steel fittings than was originally planned, adding 4 more feet to the length of stainless steel tubing than was supplied. Obtaining the proper reference material is just part of the project, along with proper training and appropriate licensing. If you want to do the job, do the job properly.

If someone is a penny pincher, installing a CNG system is not for you. This is why there is a huge proliferation of off-shore kits for sale, and why very few of them are even trying to get them certified for US use, the market is strong enough to just sell non-52 compliant kits. The difference between a 52 complaint and a non-compliant off-shore kit can be almost double.

Still lecturing to deaf ears.
Franz

jblue
05-06-2009, 09:43 AM
Obtaining the proper reference material is just part of the project, along with proper training and appropriate licensing.Agreed, but clearly, as this thread shows, there are installs being done that are unsafe according to the best practices of the industry.

If these installs are being done because the installer is not wanting to spend the money to do it right or they just do not know any better or both is subjective. On the flip side, at least from my point of view, the CNG community on the whole has not done anything to address the steep learning curve.

Without a doubt some things cannot be learned from a book, but everything that can should not be locked up with a price tag. At the very least there should be website devoted to CNG installs that is a clearing house for all things CNG install related. It describes how to get started, what needs to be purchased and where to go for training and, most importantly, why. This way instead of just gripping about the bad/cheap installs, we can still point at them and make fun of them for being stupid morons but then point them to the clearing house website to do it right.

I would do it if I knew how, but I know zip.

Adrian
05-06-2009, 10:25 AM
I think the biggest problem is a lack of free and easy information.

Do you want to educate yourself about NFPA 52. Ha. 40 bucks please (http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/AboutTheCodes.asp?DocNum=52&cookie_test=1).

Want to educate yourself about the NGV2 spec? Ha. A whopping $455.00 please. (http://www.shopcsa.ca/onlinestore/ISO_Search_Results.asp?query=ngv2&x=0&y=0)

:mad:

If the institutions involved truly cared about safety more than income, these materials would be available for free on the internet.

Highmarker
05-06-2009, 10:43 AM
jblue,

I can understand your concern. But let me put it this way:

If you want to rebuild your transmission, would you:

A. Have someone you hardly know who runs a shop out of his garage, who "thinks" he can do it because he knows how to turn a wrench.
B. Do it yourself and try to find manuals, books, and come up the learning curve by yourself.
C. Have a mechanic shop that has "gone to school" on it, and has years experience in rebuilding transmissions and is ASE certified.

Sure "C" is going to cost a lot more, but you know it will be done right, is safe, and is probably warranteed.

The same thing goes for CNG installs. This is not for the person who "thinks" they can do it because they know how to change the oil. There is a reason why ASE has certification programs available for CNG installation, maintainance, and repair and why NFPA 52 is so important.

If you want to know what is contained in NFPA 52 for "free" they have a 2005 draft available for download. See link below:

http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/AboutTheCodes.asp?DocNum=52

At the bottom of this page you will see a link to "A2005 ROP Draft"

This version of NFPA 52 is a draft only and should not be used for actual NFPA 52 regulations. But it gives you an idea of what is contained in NFPA 52.

NGV2 is published by ANSI and is mainly for the CNG cylinder manufacturers. There is hardly anything in NGV2 regarding cylinder installation. It just says that NFPA 52 should be followed when installing a CNG cylinder. NGV2 has specific design and test requirements that must be met by the CNG cylinder manufacturer.

jblue
05-06-2009, 11:39 AM
There is a reason why ASE has certification programs available for CNG installation, maintainance, and repair and why NFPA 52 is so important.And that is where the disconnect in this conversation is at.

:)

It would seem that the only way one can gain the necessary training in NGV's is only if one is paid to work on them in some fashion. I do not want to make a living wrenching on other peoples cars/trucks. I am a technically literate person who also is mechanically literate and I do not think that it is reasonable for people like me to be precluded from learning how to maintaining their own NGV's because they prefer a different career.

Because of the lack of information, I have to resort to doing things like taking pictures of "official" aftermarket like these to try and figure how it is done.

*sigh*

afvman
05-06-2009, 01:35 PM
Non-NFPA et al,

WOW, this the best idea I've seen in this thread! Making good information available thru the CNGChat forum could make a real contribution to the NGV community and the industry as a whole.

I wish I'd thought of it! There are several of us that I'm sure would be willing to contribute. I know Larrycng, Franz, myself and others would be happy to help. The only obstacle is that we'd like to get paid...a little, not much, but a little. So, if there's enough interest I'd say let's do it!

I'll start a new survey with pricing options to see what folks would be willing to pay for a custom CNGChat Conversion Basics class and we'll see!

afvman/Billl

jblue
05-06-2009, 02:08 PM
I'll start a new survey with pricing options to see what folks would be willing to pay for a custom CNGChat Conversion Basics class and we'll see!Count me in!

:D

John Mitton
05-06-2009, 02:36 PM
We can easily set this up via a private forum for which only subscribers could access ^

larrycng
05-06-2009, 09:37 PM
I'm in also

JBlue, how about the rest of the story on the pictures; maybe some wider shots if you have them.

The second one looks like a defueling valve or maybe an on road refueling to help another vehicle that ran out of fuel?

Larrycng

jblue
05-06-2009, 10:00 PM
JBlue, how about the rest of the story on the pictures; maybe some wider shots if you have them.I wish I knew. Those are the only two pictures I took at the time.

:)

That install is on an ONG service truck that was parked near a pump where I was fueling. What you cannot see in the second picture is that the line exits to the right into a tee. From there it continues onto the opposite side of the truck terminating with the same valve/connectors setup that is in the picture. Out of the bottom of the tee, a line drops down and under the cab of the truck to what, I assume, is the HPR so the truck can run on Natural Gas.

larrycng
05-06-2009, 10:27 PM
Interesting, thanks

It is a strange sound setup

Larrycng

Highmarker
05-07-2009, 06:59 AM
I'm in also.

I would not consider myself a guru on "installations", although I am familiar with NFPA 52. But I guess I could contribute on the DOT FMVSS 304 and ANSI NGV2 side of things.

Highmarker
05-07-2009, 08:35 AM
Here is a new one. This is off a 2005 Dodge Diesel/CNG for sale on KSL.com

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=1276847

The HPR is directly connected to the cylinder valve. I don't know what to think. I'm kind of glad I'm not inspecting this one, because I don't know what to think. Maybe afvman or larrycng could shed some light on this one.

larrycng
05-07-2009, 09:43 AM
This is a new one on me.

Although it is not mounted or supported by any fuel lines as per 52-6.8.3, there are a lot of forces (including stupidity) working on bottom half of the regulator housing. I don't believe that HPR was designed by Impco to be mounted in that fashion. This might be a consideration for a future 6.8.4 in NFPA 52. I believe this regulator came with a mounting bracket. This looks like a cheap out to avoid high pressure tubing. I wonder where they got fitting to attach the HPR to the valve and what kind of material it is made of?

Where are the coolant lines? the cold from the refirgeration effect of the gas changing pressure could weaken the housing.

The bottom line on this one would be to check with Impco on the mounting requirements for this regulator. Until I found out for sure, this would be a very questionable level II purely on personal opinion that there was a significant safety question.

Good picture, thanks

Larrycng

afvman
05-07-2009, 10:04 AM
Man, this just gets better and better. I looked at the listing at KSL and it shows this as a 'Bi-Fuel' which means it can run on one or the other but not both. So...

I called the owner, Brian, and he said KSL's ad template doesn't have an option for a 'Duel Fuel', which it is...

Now this raises more questions, beyond the safety issues larrycng points out. The concern about CNG/diesel blending is blowing up engines! Diesels like the higher octane fuel and can overheat in a heartbeat. The 'kit' was installed by Performance Diesel Inc. in St. George, UT. Looking at their website, I don't see any exhaust temp sensors or a way to cut back on the CNG (listed as 70%!) if it begins to get too high.

This is pretty primitive technology and did fry some early on, but they run GREAT...for a while! We don't need more huffed engines leaving a bad impression in peoples minds about the viability of CNG.

So, we'll see.

afvman

Kevin Fern
05-07-2009, 01:26 PM
:eek:Is the Natural Gas being introduced before the compression vane of the turbo? wow!!

cowboy
05-07-2009, 08:07 PM
This is a new one on me.

Although it is not mounted or supported by any fuel lines as per 52-6.8.3, there are a lot of forces (including stupidity) working on bottom half of the regulator housing. I don't believe that HPR was designed by Impco to be mounted in that fashion. This might be a consideration for a future 6.8.4 in NFPA 52. I believe this regulator came with a mounting bracket. This looks like a cheap out to avoid high pressure tubing. I wonder where they got fitting to attach the HPR to the valve and what kind of material it is made of?

Where are the coolant lines? the cold from the refirgeration effect of the gas changing pressure could weaken the housing.

The bottom line on this one would be to check with Impco on the mounting requirements for this regulator. Until I found out for sure, this would be a very questionable level II purely on personal opinion that there was a significant safety question.

Good picture, thanks

Larrycng

this is the same hpr that I used on my dodge pu when I built it and it comes with a bracket that gos on the hp inlit and a nut gos on the threads on the out side and it also has a clamp that holds the other end so I whould have to say hell no to hanging on tank as it would give it to much leverage and would break the pipe or the valve if it were impacted

cowboy
05-07-2009, 08:16 PM
:eek:Is the Natural Gas being introduced before the compression vane of the turbo? wow!!

it will be well mixed I have done this with propane and goofy gas years ago on a 12 valve cummins and it worked very well can you spell drive shaft dont have one anymore we just put the spray bars in the intake and sprayed liquid cool till it broke never broke the motor

Highmarker
05-19-2009, 08:02 AM
This is a picture of a tank on a Plymouth Voyager for sale on craigslist in Los Angeles. See link below:

http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/ctd/1177589025.html

This is a Comdyne tank with no shielding. All tanks mounted underneath the vehicle need to be shielded. See NFPA 52 6.3.2.1

The interesting thing about this one is that it has the blue "PASS" sticker on the tank inspection. However, who knows when it was inspected.

cnghal
05-19-2009, 08:45 AM
Jared,
That is a typical late 90's stock Dodge install (Pre NGV-98 standards). My '95 Dodge Ram 3500 van is the same way. Shields on valves and near exhaust only.

Highmarker
05-19-2009, 08:52 AM
cnghal,

Was 1998 the first edition of NFPA 52?

cnghal
05-19-2009, 09:16 AM
As far as I remember, the ANSI/CSA NGV standards started in 98. NFPA (different standard) has had many releases. We would have to ask Bill, Larry or Franz for a chronological history. The earliest history on NFPA52 I can find at NFPA is 2005.

larrycng
05-19-2009, 09:29 AM
Hi guys;

I have a '92 edition of NFPA 52 and I believe there was an '88 edition, which I may have ('88, '92, '95, '98, 2002, 2006, and 2010 coming) I'll let you know when I get home in October.

As far as the tanks go, the mid '90s dodge Caravans had 4 tanks mounted crosswise between the axle. They had thin metal plates, the were bent to about a 120 deg included angle, made of around 16 gauge metal attached to the tank brackets, infront and in back of the each tank. there was 4 to 6 inch gap opening that exposed the bottom sidewall of the tank to what-ever. The one in the picture apperars to have the fromt shield but not the rear shield. The rear shield would provide good "witness marks" of anything that hit it - like backing into a high curb or parking block.

later

Larrycng

jblue
06-03-2009, 10:20 AM
1234567890

Highmarker
06-03-2009, 11:10 AM
1234567890

Here is the link to the website for this picture:

http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/index.html

You need to click on the link about the CNG conversion "Is it still worth it when fuel is cheap"

This is a diesel/cng conversion. Here is what I find wrong with this one:

1. No rubber between the tank and the brackets.
2. Wood blocking under the tank.:eek:
3. Weak support of the tank valve/fill nozzle.:eek:
4. No cover/shielding.

Thanks for posting the picture jblue.

jblue
06-03-2009, 03:11 PM
The wood blocking under the tank is what killed me the most!

:rolleyes:

Dude. Morons.

CraziFuzzy
06-04-2009, 02:42 AM
The wood blocking under the tank is what killed me the most!

:rolleyes:

Dude. Morons.

is wood explicitly listed as a non-approved material for tank supports??? who knows, it MIGHT be strong enough... ;-)

Highmarker
06-04-2009, 01:21 PM
is wood explicitly listed as a non-approved material for tank supports??? who knows, it MIGHT be strong enough... ;-)

CraziFuzzy,

NFPA 52 does not list approved or non-approved materials. However, fuel container supply racks shall meet 6.3.4 (withstand a force equal to 8 times the weight of the fuel container full of CNG in all 6 principal directions with a maximum movement of 1/2 inch). Also all supports shall resist deterioration. Wood deteriorates over time.

Highmarker
06-04-2009, 03:30 PM
is wood explicitly listed as a non-approved material for tank supports??? who knows, it MIGHT be strong enough... ;-)

I failed to mention that NFPA 52 6.3.10.1 mentions "A resilient gasket that does not retain water SHALL be installed between the clamping bands and THEIR SUPPORTS and a container".

This implies that the only thing touching the fuel container is the resilient gasket (rubber) not wood or any other material.

larrycng
06-04-2009, 08:53 PM
You're doing real good with NFPA 52, keep pu the good work Jered

I'm drafting a letter to Diesel Power Magazine to point out that the dual fuel conversion featured in their article had several safety problems. They may want to point out these considerations so that others will be aware of guidlines (and sometimes legal requirements) for CNG cylinder and fuel system installation.

They want to make their readers aware of such requirements to reduce their exposure and their readers exposure to unsafe system installation practices, and also to reduce their exposure to liability

Larrycng

CraziFuzzy
06-06-2009, 03:19 AM
CraziFuzzy,

NFPA 52 does not list approved or non-approved materials. However, fuel container supply racks shall meet 6.3.4 (withstand a force equal to 8 times the weight of the fuel container full of CNG in all 6 principal directions with a maximum movement of 1/2 inch). Also all supports shall resist deterioration. Wood deteriorates over time.

Well, I was joking, obviously wood is not correct to use.

Highmarker
06-24-2009, 03:13 PM
2006 Toyota Corolla on KSL.com. See link below.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=443&sid=&tab=list/view&ad=1380122

Not vented to the outside of the car.

larrycng
06-24-2009, 09:05 PM
Who did the installation?

Looks like there are no gromets or bulkhead connectors on the high pressure lines where they pass through the body. There is also appears to a tank bracket alignment problem. Bracket alignment could damage the overwrap. In my no so humble opinion, poor workmanship.

That is a strange looking valve. Is there a PRD in the valve, I can't tell from the picture.

Larrycng

Highmarker
06-25-2009, 07:09 AM
Larrycng,

I believe it is a Sherwood vavle with the PRD sticking out the bottom of the vavle. It looks like they do have the PRD venting out the bottom.

I'm not sure it the bracket is misaligned or if the picture just makes it look that way. But also the bracket is covering a label.

Good catch on the missing gromet on the high pressure line.

larrycng
06-25-2009, 09:05 AM
Highmaker, the only question I have would be, is the PRD vent line smaller than the outlet hole in the PRD? If so, that would be restriction and a no-no

Larrycng

jblue
06-28-2009, 09:05 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270416206656

No bagging that can be seen, label is partially obscured. But who really wants a tank sitting right there anyway ..

afvman
06-29-2009, 05:10 AM
Man, I don't think that was an original Ford installation.

That guy's got to be a believer! Reminds me of Doctor Strangelove. Why not put it under the seat and just hang on!

afvman

Franz
06-29-2009, 09:19 AM
There appears to be one underneath, next to the driveshaft. That is one crappy extended range addition! Hey! Its in Ohio, might be an opportunity for an inspection AFVM!

Franz

Highmarker
06-29-2009, 09:35 AM
This is a different Ford van that what was posted earlier. See link below:

http://www.cngchat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=25725&postcount=73

The VINs are different in the ebay adds.

However, they are from the same fleet company. How many vans do they have with the CNG tank as a "cup holder"?

Highmarker
07-01-2009, 10:54 AM
This is a 2001 Dodge Ram 2500 Bi-Fuel (see link below).

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=443&sid=733005&tab=list/view&ad=1383641

It has 4 tanks located under the vehicle.

The first set of tanks are located directly under the cab with NO SHIELDING:eek:

The second set of tanks are located under the bed behind the rear axle also with NO SHIELDING.:eek: Also, it is hard to tell, but the exhaust might be within 8 inches of the tank on the right. Not to mention that is a lot of rust.

scottfetsh
07-01-2009, 11:41 AM
whats the big deal about mounting transversely behind the rear axle. it seems to me to be safe on a truck or other full frame application. just make sure the valve and prd are protected.

Highmarker
07-01-2009, 12:32 PM
whats the big deal about mounting transversely behind the rear axle. it seems to me to be safe on a truck or other full frame application. just make sure the valve and prd are protected.

scottfetsh,

The "big deal" is a rear impact. If the cylinder mounted so that the valve and PRD are pointing toward the rear of the vehicle, then in a rear-end collision, the valve and PRD are exposed to the impact. Thus the requirement to have the cylinder(s) mounted transversely if they are located behind the rear axle. There is an exception to this:
Cylinders shall be permitted to be installed in other orientations where the container valve and fittings are located at the end of the container must be protected from a source of impact.
The easiest way to "protect" the valve and fittings is to mount the cylinder with the valve pointed toward the front of the vehicle.

scottfetsh
07-01-2009, 04:26 PM
thats exactly what i mean. if the truck has a class 3 hitch or some other sturdy crossmember behind the cylinder and the valve is forward AND not near any other frame member or axel. i mean i've never seen a frame crush like an accordion before, usually it bends in the middle near the cab.

scottfetsh
07-01-2009, 04:30 PM
Cylinders shall be permitted to be installed in other orientations where the container valve and fittings are located at the end of the container must be protected from a source of impact.------ this is vague at best. nfpa should be more clear in this area

Highmarker
07-02-2009, 10:25 AM
Okay, I am posting these pictures to NOT make fun of the guy who did this installation, but to educate the people about proper CNG installations.

These pictures are of a 1996 Nissan Altima that I inspected recently. The CNG kit is from the company in Argentina (we all know their name). The tanks are off of some Chrysler vehicle. They are made by Pressed Steel, but have the Chrysler symbol on them. The guy said that when he bought the tanks, the brackets came with them. The tanks are mounted in the trunk of the car. Okay here we go..

Picture #1:
This shows a significant gap between the bracket and the tank. With this big of gap it means that 180 around the tank is probably seeing some stress during filling. The other bracket on the tank has the same gap.

Picture #2:
Where do I begin...Underneath the tank, just to the left of the bracket there is a yellow strap that holds the brackets/tanks in place. There is another yellow strap on the other end of the tank. These yellow straps are tied to a 1/2" thick plywood under the carpet in the trunk. The plywood is then bolted to some aluminum plate mounted under the trunk.:eek: The problem with straps is they deteriorate over time and they are more exposed than bolts and could get damaged. Also in this picture you can see the valves and fittings are not properly vented to the outside. Also, the red cap to the left of the valve is the filling receptacle mounted inside the trunk. NFPA 52 is not clear on the proper location for mounting the filling receptacle only that it need to withstand a break-away force of 150 lbs. But one of the most common places for CNG leaks is the filling receptacle.

Picture #3:
To the right of the vavle and under the white tubing is the PRD. The PRD is not properly vented to the outside of the car.

I of course did not give this guy a passing grade. Hopefully he gets these things fixed.

Franz
07-02-2009, 10:42 AM
Jared:

For every one of you who does a thorough job of CNG vehicle inspections, there are a hundred who do not. And more than likely a magnitude more of people who are screaming that the government has too many controls on these vehicles, and for the government to "lighten up" the restrictions to propogate more conversions.

So, I wonder how long this person will take to repair the installation?

Sigh.

Franz

larrycng
07-02-2009, 05:39 PM
I'm afraid you're right Franz. Part of the problem is people take short cuts in the installation process not following the kit manufacturer's instruction and them getting them tested for tail pipe emission and OBD II, let alone correct the engine/computer problems.

Good Job Jered. Pictures like that with the actual problems and descriptions will help education the whole CNG commumity. I am surprised they put the Argentine valve on the tanks.

Larrycng

Kevin Fern
07-03-2009, 11:52 AM
Jared:

For every one of you who does a thorough job of CNG vehicle inspections, there are a hundred who do not. And more than likely a magnitude more of people who are screaming that the government has too many controls on these vehicles, and for the government to "lighten up" the restrictions to propogate more conversions.

So, I wonder how long this person will take to repair the installation?

Sigh.

Franz

Franz, you are right, the folks who scream that the government has too much control are the first ones who blame it on the government when something goes wrong (i.e stock market), they cry and whine about taxes on a street corner, that was built by tax money. Its simple do the job right and don't take shortcuts. I've seen these types of issues every since I started in this business in 1993, Kevin

Highmarker
08-05-2009, 07:51 AM
What will people think of next...

How about converting a Honda Civic? This is listed on KSL.com (see link below).

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=443&sid=&tab=list/view&ad=1491614

This is a Honda Civic EX, LX, DX, or HX that has been converted to CNG. The attached picture show a few things wrong.

1. No bagging to vent pressure connections to the outside.
2. It appears that there is no rubber gasket between the tank and the brackets.
3. I don't see a label. I would guess that the tank is from China and is not DOT FMVSS 304 approved.
4. I am also not a fan of having the fill receptacle inside the vehicle.

larrycng
08-05-2009, 07:22 PM
Naa Jared, it is a "CX" "C" is for converted. From the looks of things, he decreased the value of the vehicle. I would like to see what was used for hight pressure tubing -- bet it wasn't stainless.

Larrycng

Highmarker
09-02-2009, 04:08 PM
Note from forum staff:
Responses to the following post took on a life of their own, so we have moved the posts to a new thread in the Safety Forum here:
http://www.cngchat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5491

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's one with a story:

The link below is about a couple that converted their 2003 Jeep to CNG. They state in their story, "And remember, EPA approval is not required if you keep the regular gas tank in place and use the vehicle as a gas/CNG hybrid".

http://coachellavalleygreen.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=71&Itemid=100

I guess you'll believe anything someone else tells you. Anyway, their conversion was done by Greenline Fuel Corporation.

http://greenlinefuelcorp.com/aboutus.aspx

From the link above you can see pictures of the Jeep's conversion. I have attached the picture that shows the tank. There is not bagging around the high pressure connections and venting them to the outside.

On a side note: Greenline Fuel Corporation uses CNG Interstate products based out of St. George, Utah. If you look on CNG Interstates website:

http://cnginterstate.com/about

You'll find that they use "emulators" to control the electronic signals between the sensors/injectors and the computer.:rolleyes:

larrycng
01-11-2010, 09:25 PM
This tread has been quiet for a while. I didn't expect to find anything in Yucca Valley, Ca. I'll let this one speak for itself. There are several actual NFPA 52 violations and some things that would provoke some discussion. I'm staying clear of this Chevy/GMC van that is licensed in Calif. It does have a CNG diamond.

Have fun

Larrycng

CNG Utah
01-11-2010, 09:28 PM
How about these tanks for sale on Craigslist? I don't think I'd want these mounted in my truck.

Highmarker
01-11-2010, 10:21 PM
This tread has been quiet for a while. I didn't expect to find anything in Yucca Valley, Ca. I'll let this one speak for itself. There are several actual NFPA 52 violations and some things that would provoke some discussion. I'm staying clear of this Chevy/GMC van that is licensed in Calif. It does have a CNG diamond.

Have fun

Larrycng

Larry,

Is that the filling nozzle located between the two tanks? That is all too crazy.

jblue
01-11-2010, 10:22 PM
I'll let this one speak for itself.dude. Totally.

larrycng
01-12-2010, 09:05 AM
Yes Jered, that is the fuel connector, and this isn't even Utah. Calif. is noted for being a leader in many areas. :rolleyes:

Larrycng

cnghal
01-12-2010, 09:12 AM
How about these tanks for sale on Craigslist? I don't think I'd want these mounted in my truck.

Amazing Stupidity !!! How quickly $3,000-4,000 in viable tanks can turn into $200-300 in scrap metal. :confused:
That's assuming the scrap dealer will accept them or the owner doesn't kill themselves taking the valves off. :eek:

cnghal
01-12-2010, 09:18 AM
This tread has been quiet for a while. I didn't expect to find anything in Yucca Valley, Ca. I'll let this one speak for itself. There are several actual NFPA 52 violations and some things that would provoke some discussion. I'm staying clear of this Chevy/GMC van that is licensed in Calif. It does have a CNG diamond.

Have fun

Larrycng

With a three pound sledgehammer, that ladder rack becomes an awesome rocket launcher !!! :eek:

Larry, were you using a telephoto lens, or did you actually get that close to this IED/WMD ?

larrycng
01-12-2010, 01:11 PM
I took it with the cell phone camera. You dumb thing when you get on in years.

?????CNG

cngacrossusa
01-12-2010, 01:30 PM
Amazing !!! CA has that death trap on the road, but EPA only recently relaxed guidelines for converting existing vehicles to multiple engine families. Highway Patrol needs to impound that sucker!!

How about push for regional (then later state by state) certified conversion shops that could REMEDY an atrocity like this Chevy van just waiting to send those tanks flying in maybe just a 15 mph fender bender ??!!!**##%%??!!

CNG Utah
03-08-2010, 09:18 PM
Here's a beauty I just found for sale in Utah.
http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=733005&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=2265794
http://i47.tinypic.com/2yu0f82.jpg

cnghal
03-09-2010, 08:25 AM
Now I get it!
After reading the ad, I see he's deploying soon.
So this is obviously an I.E.D.I.O.T (Improvised Explosive Device Identification & Obsevation Training, Pronounced "Idiot") exercise.
Good to see our tax dollars at work training these boy to protect us from such dangerous things.
I don't know about you, but I'll sleep better tonite knowing he'll soon be "Over There", protecting us from these terrorist devices !!!

John Mitton
03-09-2010, 08:26 AM
All, please report Utah violations to:
Sgt. Glen Porter
gporter@utah.gov
Safety inspection office (801)965-4889

cnghal
03-09-2010, 08:31 AM
Thanks John, you mean Utah actually has "CNG Police" on the job?

larrycng
03-09-2010, 09:36 AM
There seem to be a lot of CNG cylinders mounted with cargo straps :rolleyes: Has there be an exception in NFPA -52 to allow the use of cargo straps to tie down CNG cylinders in Utah :confused:

Just checking

Larrycng

John Mitton
03-09-2010, 09:51 AM
Tank inspections are now mandatory in Utah at 3 yrs / 36,000 miles
http://cngchat.com/forum/showthread.php?6301-New-reqt-Utah-%28mandatory-tank-inspection%29

Highmarker
08-18-2010, 02:15 PM
Here's another one. These pictures are off a 2006 Nissan Sentra. The guy bought this vehicle at the height of the CNG boom in Utah and paid a pretty penny for the vehicle. He said he bought straight from the conversion shop (out of business now) and it was their show car to show how "good" their installs were.

Brackets are unacceptable. No rubber between them and the tank. High pressure connections are not sealed up and venting to the outside. The PRD is missing (see the plug on the bottom of the valve). The tank is placed right up against the framing supporting the back seat and the sheet metal is digging in the composite overwrap. You can see the "plummer's strap" is slipping off the end of the tank.

The guy wasn't too happy that he paid top dollar for this car in 2008, and finds out that the install is low class.

cnghal
08-18-2010, 03:19 PM
May God have mercy on his neighbors!!!

afvman
08-18-2010, 03:31 PM
...gotta love those self-tapping screws!

afvman/Bill

larrycng
08-18-2010, 08:33 PM
and I thought things had settled down. You never know what is going to rear its ugly head.

Larrycng

cngacrossusa
08-19-2010, 07:20 AM
And I thought "plumbers straps" were for hot water tanks in earthquate states like CA !??!!##?!! These the same "plumbers" that are price gouging for install of Phil ??

If you look close, might be a couple kinks in the stainless steel tubing as well. Installing a cng tank without a PRD ought to result in ball peen hammer being used on the head of the installer!! Arrrggghhh!!##?!!

larrycng
08-19-2010, 09:21 AM
Actually plumbers strap has many uses. NPSiM 52* section 6.4.2 explains the criteria for wraping it around a CNG installer who used plumbers strap for a CNG vehicle tank mounting straps, and mounting HIM, in the trunk, with his "rube goldburg" installation so that he can observe, first hand what happens when it breaks lose. There is an option in this use to leave one hand free so he can operate a camera to document the damage.

*NPSIM - 52 National Plumbers Strap Inspection Manual for CNG Vehicle Installation :rolleyes:

Larrycng

PS Why damage a good hammer?

Highmarker
08-19-2010, 10:10 AM
FYI for those who live in Utah.

I had to call the UHP on this one. I wasn't sure how the UHP would want to proceed. I mean, the guy was only having his tank inspected so he could pass the vehicle safety inspection for the state. I wanted to know what the UHP's stand on was for "isolating" the tank from the system until he gets its fixed so he can pass the vehicle safety inspection and still operate the vehicle. UHP told me that simply turning the tank "off" was not enough, because there was no control over the vehicle owner turning the tank back on and using the system after the vehicle safety inspection. UHP wants the tank removed from the vehicle during the re-work period if the vehicle owner wishes to pass the vehicle safety inspection without an operable CNG system. So, bottom line, if your CNG vehicle does not pass the tank inspection and there is re-work to be done, if you want to pass the vehicle safety inspection before you have your tank re-worked, you must remove the tank from the vehicle.

larrycng
08-19-2010, 10:06 PM
Now that's what I call putting "teeth" in your laws and regulations

Congratulation to Utah

Larrycng

Highmarker
07-01-2011, 03:59 PM
I thought we had "thinned the herd" on these NFPA 52 non-conforming installs. And these guys claim to be experts. :rolleyes:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=218&ad=16186047&cat=&lpid=&search=cng

2459

larrycng
07-01-2011, 06:16 PM
Just checked out their site and disclaimer -- who are these "bozos" Nothing is certified, you have to hold them harmless for just about anything. On second though, I guess it would the buyer who is the "Bozo" Buyer beware.

If they sold the kit in Calif, they could go to jail "... can not ... sell, offer for sale..." (from Calif. Vehicle Code)

Lakewood90712
07-01-2011, 08:29 PM
I thought we had "thinned the herd" on these NFPA 52 non-conforming installs. And these guys claim to be experts. :rolleyes:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=218&ad=16186047&cat=&lpid=&search=cng

2459

They are experts. They know you will need a tow strap when the system they install fails, so they included one. Doubles as the mounting for the tank.

afvman
07-02-2011, 10:23 AM
"...8x the weight of the (full) cylinder in any of the six principle directions???"

Man, those are some strong straps!

afvman

cnghal
07-04-2011, 12:13 AM
Well, if that doesn't scare you....the picture of muddy LC cylinders stacked inside should. If I'm not mistaken, they look like the 16 x 49 bus cylinders coming out of LA that have been stacked and stored outside in the mud, dragged across asphalt parking lots, thrown into and stacked unsecured into a Uhaul truck so that the sides bulged out, transported across state lines to Utah all while having as much as 2,500 psi of gas in them. Not all though, some were uncontrollably vented to atmosphere in LA and the valves left open so that the plastic bladder can collapse over time which makes for an interesting first refueling for the unsuspecting new owner.

Caveat Emptor...No, Be afraid....be very afraid!!!

Highmarker
07-08-2011, 09:44 AM
What is wrong with people. I have contacted the seller of the Jetti and given him a little piece of my mind.

24672468

This is flat out scary. See ad on ksl here:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=0&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=4413693

larrycng
07-08-2011, 05:29 PM
What is that cradle made of??
Give him a piece for me

Larrycng

Highmarker
07-08-2011, 07:01 PM
What is that cradle made of??
Give him a piece for me

Larrycng

To me it looks like 1/2 inch thick steel cut with a torch. But it could be wood, just painted black. Obviously not rubber gasket is used either.

CNG MOTORS
09-26-2011, 12:17 PM
For some reason, the picture of this tank makes me feel a little un-easy. This is from a car on KSL right now. The guys website says he can convert just about anything.

This one has got to be my favorite how many violations can you get in one picture. :0)

CNG MOTORS
09-29-2011, 11:47 AM
This was my favorite of all the violations:

1. Tanks brackets OMG
2. No vent bag
3. No expansion loop on the line
4. Are those alligator clips?
5. Fill nozzle in the trunk able to vent to the cab
(at least the tank wasn't expired)

The fill nozzle has a high failure rate for leaking because it's in constant use. And the person who did this installation I'm sure did not a 1 way check valve behind it. Now just think of children sitting just on the other side of that seat.

Highmarker
01-03-2012, 01:20 PM
These pictures are from a 2000 Ford Expedition, possibly back from the "good old" Arizona days. It is for sale on KSL.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=0&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=4893719

Here are two pictures of the tanks. One set mounted underneath without any shielding. Shielding is required for tanks mounted underneath the vehicle. The other is of another set mounted behind the rear seat. There is no bagging around the valves/lines and they used rubber hosing for the high pressure lines - should use stainless steel.

2874 2875

cnghal
01-03-2012, 02:53 PM
Really neat how they made those expired Comdynes in the back removable by using forklift propane bottle clamps.

BTW, Jared... don't blame this on AZ, there wasn't a whole lot of Technocarb going around in 2000. Looks like a straight up Utard install to me.

larrycng
01-03-2012, 06:30 PM
Check the lable and see who did it. AZ start was the big company's one name and then it changed. I can't remember the other name. The company changed hands around '01 or '02 and the guys that took it over did not do work as in picture

Bill, your 2 cents please

Larrycng

cnghal
01-03-2012, 09:36 PM
The AZStar systems I've seen were the old servo drive mixer FMS systems.

joe_kan
01-04-2012, 09:37 AM
I'm going to start putting pictures of gasoline/diesel tanks tied up with rope and holes plugged with screws and/or bubble gum on this thread. I'm sure I can even find a few where the gasoline tank is dragging on the ground creating sparks. Even better, I,ve got loads of pictures of gasoline/diesel vehicles on fire - can't really find any pictures of U.S. NGVs on fire except for the bi-fuels that also have a gasoline tank where the gasoline tank contains the fuel for the fire. Perspective - there will always be fools regardless of what they drive.

CNG MOTORS
01-04-2012, 10:05 AM
Your right Joe, I have a pic or two of diesel tanks held up with straps. Owning a trucking company, now I know why. The metal straps rust out by the bolts and the straps fail....and the cheap solution is.... well there you go. The funny thing is new straps are only $150 for diesel tanks. How cheap do you have to be not to buy them.

cowboy
01-04-2012, 08:41 PM
why buy new tank straps I just weld them a little piece of metal over the rusty spot and two min with the wire welder than it is the strongest part where it is welded. as it is not how much money you make it is how much you dont spend that counts and to answer your question of how cheap do you have to be about as cheap as me LOL there is nothing on a truck that cant be fixed including a frame rail and that my friends is why I am still out here trucking with no out standing balance on anything at the end of the month. keep in mind some folks work two or three days to make 150 dollers. my grandmother told us kids to take care of the pennys and the dollers will take care themselves. ps most of the time when my trucks get dot inspected I get my little cvsa sticker on my window

cnghal
01-04-2012, 10:08 PM
I'm going to start putting pictures of gasoline/diesel tanks tied up with rope and holes plugged with screws and/or bubble gum on this thread. I'm sure I can even find a few where the gasoline tank is dragging on the ground creating sparks. Even better, I,ve got loads of pictures of gasoline/diesel vehicles on fire - can't really find any pictures of U.S. NGVs on fire except for the bi-fuels that also have a gasoline tank where the gasoline tank contains the fuel for the fire. Perspective - there will always be fools regardless of what they drive.

Joe,
Seems you're missing a big part of the idea of this thread/site...
"It's not the fuel that's dangerous... it's the pressure."

BTW, there's and interesting video of a CNG bus burning floating around cyberspace. It shows how a proper install/venting system are supposed to work.

John Mitton
01-05-2012, 10:37 AM
It was a bus fire in Maryland, see our discussion here:
http://cngchat.com/forum/showthread.php?6833-Maryland-CNG-bus-fire-video&highlight=blow+torch

joe_kan
01-05-2012, 10:55 AM
Joe,
Seems you're missing a big part of the idea of this thread/site...
"It's not the fuel that's dangerous... it's the pressure."

BTW, there's and interesting video of a CNG bus burning floating around cyberspace. It shows how a proper install/venting system are supposed to work.

I don't think I'm missing the the idea here. So there is a picture of some NG bus in a second or third world country that has fires on busses regularly (regardless of the fuel). I've got more pictures of electric vehicles on fire here in the U.S. than pure NGVs. The idea this thread is inadvertantly conveying is that NGVs are more dangerous than gasoline/diesel vehicles and NFPA 52 is the answer. Pushing folks into the mindset that somehow NGVs are more dangerous when statistics do not support this. I think dragging a gasoline tank on the highway is just as dangerous as dragging a CNG tank so why is there a double standard?

My beef is not with a thread that says poor instalations or dumb installations or knucle heads and their NGVs - my beef is with linking NFPA 52 as the answer here. It is not - people who are going to do poor installations are going to do them regardless of NFPA 52. People who are going to do good instllations are going to do them because they want to be safe.

I am not anti-NFPA 52, I'm anti-stupidity. I've seen a lot more unsafe gasoline/diesel vehicles than I've seen NGVs. Lets stop pushing more goverment regulation and promote good safety practices.

larrycng
01-05-2012, 03:24 PM
I don't think I'm missing the the idea here. So there is a picture of some NG bus in a second or third world country that has fires on busses regularly (regardless of the fuel). I've got more pictures of electric vehicles on fire here in the U.S. than pure NGVs. The idea this thread is inadvertantly conveying is that NGVs are more dangerous than gasoline/diesel vehicles and NFPA 52 is the answer. Pushing folks into the mindset that somehow NGVs are more dangerous when statistics do not support this. I think dragging a gasoline tank on the highway is just as dangerous as dragging a CNG tank so why is there a double standard?

My beef is not with a thread that says poor instalations or dumb installations or knucle heads and their NGVs - my beef is with linking NFPA 52 as the answer here. It is not - people who are going to do poor installations are going to do them regardless of NFPA 52. People who are going to do good instllations are going to do them because they want to be safe.

I am not anti-NFPA 52, I'm anti-stupidity. I've seen a lot more unsafe gasoline/diesel vehicles than I've seen NGVs. Lets stop pushing more goverment regulation and promote good safety practices.

I think you are missing the point. We are not converting vehicles to gasoline from another fuel. NFPA 52 is the standard for equipment installation, it could just as well apply to gasoline if that were the new fuel. The pictures provide examples of what not to do and what not acceptable. If an individual has his vehicle converted as sees some of the installations shown in this tread, they might have and idea that there is something wrong and unsafe and hopefully have it corrected.

I agree people are going to do what they will, good or bad, but at least there is a standard.

Joe, you can not legislate common sense and intelligence. I agree we don't need anymore laws or standards, we just need to apply and enforce the ones we have.

By the way, if you are draging a gasoline tank and a cng tanks behind vehicles, my money is on the gasoline to burn and blow first. If I have to drive a Pinto I want dedicated CNG.

Larrycng

Highmarker
01-05-2012, 03:56 PM
my beef is with linking NFPA 52 as the answer here.

joe_kan,

How are we going to know if an installation if poor or dumb (to use your words)? We can't wait for that installation to fail and possibly cause damage to determine that it was poorly done. We have to have a standard to base it off of. This standard is NFPA 52.

I don't think that this thread conveys that NGVs are more dangerous than gasoline/diesel vehicles.

On a side note, NGVs have two standards to meet for installations: NFPA 52 and DOT FMVSS 303. Gasoline/diesel vehicles have one standard to meet: DOT FMVSS 301.
NFPA is not government controlled. They are an industry led organization. Same thing goes for ANSI NGV2 (CNG tank regulation).

If you are interested in FMVSS 301, here is a good read:

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/regrev/evaluate/807675.html

cowboy
01-05-2012, 08:22 PM
if someone invented the gasoline car today the goverment would never let it be put on the road. much to dangerous.why you could never let someone fuel there own car why they might smoke or use the cell phone and make a spark and burn themself up. I think NJ still wont let self service. the horse sellers and buggy makers would hire lobbyists to make sure that they stayed outlawed the problem we have is way to much goverment in this land of the FREE opps I ment the land of the governend and home of the feared.

larrycng
01-05-2012, 08:54 PM
You can't pump your own gas in Oregon either

Larrycng

Highmarker
01-06-2012, 08:55 AM
You can't pump your own gas in Oregon either

Larrycng

But I think you can pump your own CNG in Oregon!

larrycng
01-06-2012, 07:30 PM
But I think you can pump your own CNG in Oregon!

Jered, I'll check when I go through Oregon in May on our way to Washington.

Larrycng

cnguser
01-06-2012, 09:17 PM
The only public CNG stations in Oregon presently are in Medford, county government owned and attendant operated.
THEY fuel the vehicle for you - likely to ensure no misuse of their equipment.
If the proposed public station gets built in Salem by CE in 2012 and is 24/7 it would be unmaned, serve yourself, as similar in other states.
(The previous public CNG stations in Oregon were 24/7 unmaned and self serve).

Highmarker
02-03-2012, 03:02 PM
Here is another one.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=0&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=5648664

2001 Jeep Cherokee in Provo, UT. This is why we need vehicle safety inspections. See link.

http://cngchat.com/forum/showthread.php?8976-Utah-has-bill-to-get-rid-of-Safety-Inspections-(HB298)

For those who are newbies to this:

1. Brackets do not comply with NFPA-52. Straps are not to be used.
2. No bagging and venting to the outside.
3. Tank does not appear to be DOT certified.

2924

ohiojonny
03-13-2012, 01:30 PM
Hi, I'm new to CNG -- Just interested and have been looking at the Non-NFPA 52 conforming pictures. I have went all the way back to the beginning of the thread but can not find if steel HP lines are NFPA 52 compliant or if Stainless steel lines must be used ?

larrycng
03-13-2012, 08:13 PM
NFPA 52 section 4.8 is silent on the on the type of material that must be used, but states what can not be used in section 4.8.4. The tubing must also be compatible with the fuel under maximum service conditions, and shall have a minimum safety factor of 3.

There is some fuel line coming in to the country with "off shore" kit that is carbon steel and has plastic covering something like heat shrink. If the plastic coverning is compromised, then you could have rust (not a good thing). You will not have that problem with stainless.

You "pays your money and takes your chances"

Larrycng

cowboy
03-13-2012, 08:51 PM
I think steel is just fine as I have used 3/16 steel and it had a burst of 16000 psi and have never had a problem of coarse the trick I have found to save money on tubing is mount your hp regulator as close to the tank as you can and than you can use low pressure tubing the rest of the way to to the motor now that the 20 year tanks are here it might rust out before the tank runs out as I have had brake lines go at 20 years but that should be caught at the tank inspection most of the time it is cars that have sat out in a field that have brake line problems mostly 25 + years old and with the cars they are building today I dont think there will be and 25 year old cars in 25 years might be some 50 or 75 year old ones but not 25 year old ones

cowboy
03-13-2012, 09:02 PM
You can't pump your own gas in Oregon either

Larrycng

I dont want to pump it I just want to dispence it pumping it would be like hard work to get to 3600 psi pumping gas went the way of horse and buggy when the glass top pumps (they had a handle on the side that pumped the gas up into a glass tank that had gallon marks and you pumped the amount of gas you wanted than you let it run down into your car) were replaced with elt pumps and dispencers the goverment has not updated the laws to stay with the times just like a lot of the cng laws

VanDeWitt
04-16-2012, 11:40 AM
I have some good ones for you......I work at Go Natural CNG in Woods Cross Utah......all of the inclosed photos i have taken on site get ready for the HORROR that is the Utah CNG world!!!!!

CNG HORROR (http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3872253283798.177686.1202638094&type=3)

VanDeWitt
04-16-2012, 11:46 AM
that link may not work for you......

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/579307_3872264324074_1202638094_3865408_781007464_ n.jpg
http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/579307_3872264404076_1202638094_3865409_1483723517 _n.jpg
http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/579307_3872264524079_1202638094_3865411_1452067228 _n.jpg
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash2/s720x720/62623_3872276044367_1202638094_3865428_479373301_n .jpg
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s720x720/580515_3872292124769_1202638094_3865441_1370950213 _n.jpg
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/s720x720/62623_3872276124369_1202638094_3865429_1881397801_ n.jpg
http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/s720x720/62623_3872276164370_1202638094_3865430_932845804_n .jpg
http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/s720x720/62623_3872276204371_1202638094_3865431_94450909_n. jpg
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/s720x720/62623_3872276244372_1202638094_3865432_2046647731_ n.jpg
http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/580515_3872292164770_1202638094_3865442_1738047192 _n.jpg

VanDeWitt
04-16-2012, 11:47 AM
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/580515_3872292324774_1202638094_3865444_534517073_ n.jpg
http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/580515_3872292404776_1202638094_3865445_715890025_ n.jpg
http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s720x720/543169_3872309845212_1202638094_3865452_1483502707 _n.jpg

larrycng
04-16-2012, 02:46 PM
Great pictures. This is what new CNG system installers and inspectors need to see when they are going through training under the heading of "what not to do" or What to look for"

Thanks for posting them

Larrycng

cowboy
04-16-2012, 08:06 PM
I think we should outlaw salt as it makes for many unsafe tanks not to say brake lines and other important parts. just use sand instead and if you think you are so imporant that you have to go buy chains.

CNGLO
04-17-2012, 12:42 PM
Are those SCUBA tanks in the back of the first pic from VanDeWitt's post? The pic with the yellow nylon web fasteners.

Highmarker
04-17-2012, 02:25 PM
Are those SCUBA tanks in the back of the first pic from VanDeWitt's post? The pic with the yellow nylon web fasteners.

I believe those are Luxfer Type II tanks. Typically SCUBA tanks are Type I tanks. I don't think I have seen a composite overwrapped SCUBA tank. Why would a diver pay for the extra cost of a light-weight composite tank when he needs the weight of the tank to help him dive?

Highmarker
04-18-2012, 09:59 AM
I have some good ones for you......I work at Go Natural CNG in Woods Cross Utah......all of the inclosed photos i have taken on site get ready for the HORROR that is the Utah CNG world!!!!!

CNG HORROR (http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3872253283798.177686.1202638094&type=3)

VanDeWitt,

Can you please post an explanation as to why this tanks are not in compliance with NFPA 52 regulations. Those of us who have been around tanks and who are familiar with NFPA 52 know what is wrong in your pictures, but someone who isn't as familiar with the regulations might not know what is wrong. We would like this thread to be educational and not so much as "in your face scary". Knowledge and education is the key. Thanks for posting the pictures.

CNG MOTORS
04-18-2012, 11:12 AM
As bad as some of these are my favorite is the first one on the wooden blocks. Because you know that rachet straps crossed their mind but they knew it had to be securely mounted.

Highmarker
04-18-2012, 11:46 AM
As bad as some of these are my favorite is the first one on the wooden blocks. Because you know that rachet straps crossed their mind but they knew it had to be securely mounted.
Murph,

I think you're right. Ratchet straps crossed their mind... they have sitting there right next to the tank. LOL.

But what is the guy pointing to? It looks like a plugged PRD or something.

CNG MOTORS
04-18-2012, 05:01 PM
both of you have it wrong. The guy travels in the bed of the truck with them where ever they go to keep the leaking PRD port plugged with his finger

CNG Utah
04-24-2012, 02:14 PM
Here's an interesting tank installation on an '08 Civic.
http://i.imgur.com/vK9rb.jpg

Highmarker
04-24-2012, 03:05 PM
Here's an interesting tank installation on an '08 Civic.
http://i.imgur.com/vK9rb.jpg

This is not a GX. It is for sale on KSL. Here is the link:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=733005&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=8472314

The seller says that the installation was done by the jackballs in Syracuse. I have emailed the seller telling him about the improper installation:

1. No bagging around high pressure connections in the trunk
2. The use of wood in the tank bracket mounting
3. PRD is not venting to the outside:eek:

Highmarker
04-24-2012, 03:15 PM
This is not a GX. It is for sale on KSL. Here is the link:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=733005&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=8472314

The seller says that the installation was done by the jackballs in Syracuse. I have emailed the seller telling him about the improper installation:

1. No bagging around high pressure connections in the trunk
2. The use of wood in the tank bracket mounting
3. PRD is not venting to the outside:eek:

The same seller also has a 2005 Jeep Cherokee for sale on KSL as well. The tanks are mounted underneath the rear of the vehicle. It appears that there is no shielding on the tanks, but it is hard to tell. Buyer beware on both these vehicles.

cowbay
04-24-2012, 03:19 PM
This is stuff that hurts the industry. Just amazing that some of these people can let this stuff leave the shop as it is. No pride in their work

Franz
04-25-2012, 08:11 AM
Hopefully, by now, most of you have seen this Youtube video. It's a classic example of what NOT to do. Installation errors range from wiring, tubing routing, tank installation, non-certified components, out of country tanks, and so on.
http://youtu.be/QYP2ZRwq9EE
Franz

Robert_Stiles
04-25-2012, 11:40 AM
I just came across this thread and wished I had seen it sooner so I could have referred some others to it. There are people entering this business that feel that there is no reason for strict regulations for the industry. The feeling is that installers can "police" themselves and that will be sufficient to make this industry safe. On another site there are individuals advocating the elimination of regulation, so they can make their business' more profitable.... It is this attitude that will get us more of what we see here. As clearly shown in the variety of horror stories (pictures) presented on this blog it couldn't be more evident that more rigorous attention must be paid to the safety issues confronting this industry. Situations as depicted in this thread can only mean that someday innocent individuals will be seriously injured or worse killed due to poor quality equipment and sloppy non conforming installations. The red flag is up and somehow we need to make this a top priority to stop this type of dangerous activity. Having said all that I know it is huge task that will take more than a small group to make happen. But we need to take every opportunity to try and make our voices heard.

CNG Utah
04-25-2012, 01:46 PM
I guess I should have mentioned that it wasn't a GX but an aftermarket bi-fuel conversion. I'm so used to seeing all the factory made vehicles that any aftermarket conversion sticks out like a sore thumb to me.
I didn't link to the KSL ad because I didn't want promote his car.
-Derek


This is not a GX. It is for sale on KSL. Here is the link:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=733005&nid=443&tab=list/view&ad=8472314

The seller says that the installation was done by the jackballs in Syracuse. I have emailed the seller telling him about the improper installation:

1. No bagging around high pressure connections in the trunk
2. The use of wood in the tank bracket mounting
3. PRD is not venting to the outside:eek:

Highmarker
04-25-2012, 02:32 PM
I didn't link to the KSL ad because I didn't want promote his car.
-Derek

Good point, I will stop doing that. I will only mention the vehicle make/model/year.

andrew c
04-25-2012, 02:41 PM
theres a time to be cheap and a time not too ..
the time to be cheap with CNG is at the pump . NOT HOW YOU GOT THERE

http://www.celicasg.org/index.php/topic,804.45.html

Check that page .. scroll down and you see a picture of just a hand .- WARNING BLOOD AND GUTTS

http://syafiza.wordpress.com/2007/02/05/when-ngv-gas-exploded/

cowboy
04-25-2012, 09:20 PM
hmm I just dont understand why a propane tank rated test of 240 cant stand 3600

larrycng
04-25-2012, 10:55 PM
Just some things ain't meant to be

Lancer Automotive Group
04-30-2012, 06:16 PM
Non EPA Certified Utah conversion passed Safety Inspection* VS EPA Certified/OEM conversion using NPFA 52 standards

Can you tell which is EPA certified?

*A tragedy was prevented. The trained was allerted to the issue when the car did not pass emissions, CNG is only cleaner when it is installed properly. The Honda LX was de-converted back to gasoline and tanks we disposed of properly.

What vehicle would you want your kids riding in?

Photos complements of Alternative Vehicle Solutions

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3801150/NFPA52/AVS1.gif http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3801150/NFPA52/AVS2.gif

CNGLO
06-19-2012, 06:50 PM
Being from Utah and proud of it, I used to resent some of you referring to my fellow Utahans as "Utards." However, the following picture and the short conversation I had with the vehicle's owner is making me begin to feel that the epithet is at least applicable to some of the Utah residents I see filling up at the local CNG pumps.

The owner of this car was quite proud of his set up and freely let me take the pictures. He said it was his family car, that he knew it needed to be vented to the outside, and that he would get "metal straps" for the tanks before the car comes up for inspection in a couple of months. He was getting the contact information from an older gentleman who was there, I assume from what I overheard of their conversation so that the car owner could help the older gentleman convert a vehicle. He was discussing the video where they shoot the tanks and set off dynamite atop them. Unfortunately, I think that he thinks the tanks are indestructible and places the same confidence in high pressure supply lines that are attached to tanks which are not well attached to the car.

I bet he thinks that all the extra junk in his trunk will help hold the tanks in place.

So, let's limit the "Utard" name to the uninformed and foolish who just happen to live in Utah. As Forrest's mother says, "Stupid is as stupid does." Please don't lump me with the Utards, though. There really are a lot of us here who know how safe compressed natural gas cars can be when they are properly constructed.



30803081

cowboy
06-19-2012, 08:48 PM
dont worry he works on bicycles so he would know how to convert to cng LOL so sad it is so ez to bolt the tanks down and vent

Franz
06-20-2012, 10:26 AM
For some reason, Utah seems to be the hotbed for gypsy CNG conversions, but in all fairness, it was in Arizona around 2004, and in Texas in the early 90's. I dont think there would be this proliferation of gypsy conversions unless there were a market for them. Buyers care less about certified fuel systems and safety or emissions regulations than they do about cheap fuel and fuel systems.

Franz

Highmarker
06-20-2012, 05:11 PM
For some reason, Utah seems to be the hotbed for gypsy CNG conversions, but in all fairness, it was in Arizona around 2004, and in Texas in the early 90's. I dont think there would be this proliferation of gypsy conversions unless there were a market for them. Buyers care less about certified fuel systems and safety or emissions regulations than they do about cheap fuel and fuel systems.

Franz

So a good prediction would be... Oklahoma is next.

cnghal
06-22-2012, 07:09 AM
Being from Utah and proud of it, I used to resent some of you referring to my fellow Utahans as "Utards." However, the following picture and the short conversation I had with the vehicle's owner is making me begin to feel that the epithet is at least applicable to some of the Utah residents I see filling up at the local CNG pumps.

So, let's limit the "Utard" name to the uninformed and foolish who just happen to live in Utah. As Forrest's mother says, "Stupid is as stupid does." Please don't lump me with the Utards, though. There really are a lot of us here who know how safe compressed natural gas cars can be when they are properly constructed.

CNGLO,
Don't take it personally, it's a "If the shoe fits..." label, as you've already seen at times very applicable.
Remember, John Mitton is a Utahan, and I don't recall anyone having the stones to call him a Utard.

CNGLO
06-22-2012, 10:40 AM
So a good prediction would be... Oklahoma is next.

Yes, and Oklahoma, as I understand it, has no vehicle inspection requirements.

Highmarker
08-27-2012, 02:30 PM
Here is a tank in the back of a '97 Toyota Land Cruiser in Utah (duh!)

1. Wooden/metal brackets are insufficient and not acceptable
2. No bagging around high pressure connections to properly vent to the outside of the vehicle

3213

shikataganai
11-04-2012, 09:27 AM
Bump. Should I ever get a CNG vehicle I'll make sure to never refuel adjacent to one of the shoddily built contraptions in this thread! Scary stuff.

NortherIllinoisChuck
06-11-2014, 04:19 PM
Can anyone tell me is nfpa 52 the standard for thins being safe? If it is compliant is there other certifications that make it safer? What standard or compliance should I look for to make sure I'm all good with my insurance co not to give me any issues

GasTechAuto
06-11-2014, 11:16 PM
NFPA 52 is what I would call a standard for CNG vehicle conversions. It also contains other info such as rules for compressors, hydrogen systems, LNG, etc. I followed the CNG sections to a tee during my conversion - even such things as heat shielding for the high pressure lines. I still need to fab a plastic divider to block off the cargo area of my trunk from the tank area, and I need three stickers - 3600 psi label at the fill port, manual shut off valve near the valve, and a sticker under the hood identifying the conversion manufacturer and VIN etc. These items are not mentioned often but are in the book!

John Mitton
06-13-2014, 07:21 AM
NFPA has now made these codes available to view (not print) for free. Downloading the PDF costs $46.50
http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=52

cowboy
06-13-2014, 08:48 PM
NFPA has now made these codes available to view (not print) for free. Downloading the PDF costs $46.50
http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=52well I found the site but all the pages come up 404 error.what a surprise as those who cant end up teaching inspecting or regulating