Earthing

[nb Innisfree]

I'm surprised this thread got even a tiny amount of discussion/debate.

 

It's complete cobblers. Anyone who thinks you need an earth cable for a boat without a shoreline connection should be kept away from bulbs and batteries, let alone AC mains.

 

I came acroos a boat moored up and off shoreline with a jump lead from boat to mooring ring, his 18 month old boat had serious bottom plate pitting and he had been told this would prevent it.

[Rich]

I do though,wonder why people who have

nothing constructive to say feel they have to make any sort of comment.Is there an

award for the most posts,so anything will do?

Thanks Ditchcrawler,at least the guy who asked wasn't winding me up completely.

Fred.

 

Just want to point out that this would only be while moored,I don't understand how

anyone could think otherwise,then again,maybe I can.

 

Rule number one at CWDFs. you get used to it after a while.

[carlt]

 

Then it's two fingers to the national grid!

One in the live, one in the neutral?

 

 

One quickly learns to ignore the banter - you then can focus on the sensible stuff

 

I think you mean "ignore the humour".

 

This is a discussion forum not a professional consultancy so you shouldn't expect dry, humourless responses.

 

This forum is one of the most useful sources of information and advice available and, also, one of the most entertaining too.

[Grace and Favour]

Hi again,

I asked this question just out of curiosity,not with the intention of doing it.

I thought I may have just got an answer,nothing more,nothing less.

I don't need to be shouted at,I'm not deaf.I do though,wonder why people who have

nothing constructive to say feel they have to make any sort of comment.Is there an

award for the most posts,so anything will do?

Thanks Ditchcrawler,at least the guy who asked wasn't winding me up completely.

Fred.

 

Just want to point out that this would only be while moored,I don't understand how

anyone could think otherwise,then again,maybe I can.

 

So - - you asked a question, that wasn't entirely necessary and serious, expecting all your respondents to give freely of their constructive time and expertise

and have now had the temerity to complain that some of the answers weren't what you required!

 

I suggest you post such questions to other canal-based fora, and see if you can elicit a more suitable response

[Gibbo]

I came acroos a boat moored up and off shoreline with a jump lead from boat to mooring ring, his 18 month old boat had serious bottom plate pitting and he had been told this would prevent it.

 

 

Exactly the wrong thing to do. Unbelievable.

[FredW]

Thanks G&F,

I posted the question because I don't posses the knowledge that you obviously must have.I do see though that you do still feel it necessary to reply while having nothing to say.

Thanks to those who did give an answer that enabled me to answer the query that was put to me.

Incidentally I did find the thought of someone walking along the towpath sticking Earth rods into the ground to be funny. Perhaps a more up to date use for a changeover bridge

Fred

[ditchcrawler]

 

Exactly the wrong thing to do. Unbelievable.

And I would guess it is why the boats I saw did it.

[Grace and Favour]

Thanks G&F,

I posted the question because I don't posses the knowledge that you obviously must have.I do see though that you do still feel it necessary to reply while having nothing to say.

 

Fred

 

Whilst I didn't 'say what you required of me'' doesn't bother me in the slightest, dear chap.

 

Should I ever be in the situation where that's important to me, you'll be the last to know, I assure you

[Guest]

It's complete cobblers. Anyone who thinks you need an earth cable for a boat without a shoreline connection should be kept away from bulbs and batteries, let alone AC mains.

 

Perhaps we should start telling people that those rubber tyres between boat and bank are to prevent earth loops???

 

 

PS I know this comment is of little value, but I am hoping to upgrade from "junior member" before I reach 65. Only got a few months to sort it!

[luctor et emergo]

I hope you have a galvanic isolator?

[Radiomariner]

I'm surprised this thread got even a tiny amount of discussion/debate.

 

It's complete cobblers. Anyone who thinks you need an earth cable for a boat without a shoreline connection should be kept away from bulbs and batteries, let alone AC mains.

 

Agree. Complete cobblers. However, there is one slightly exception, and that is to do with static.

All my tankers were required to be have hull to shore earth bonding when transferring volatile cargoe's through flexible hoses. In the old days the flexible hoses did not have an internal earth system. Most modern ones do, however sometimes they fail. It used to be one of my job to check the hoses for earth continuity on a rotational basis, and quite often one or two were not up to scratch,(and heavens knows what the ones provided by the shore were like) thus it had become policy to have the additional earth wire connection. (Pumping oil through a hose at around 100 tonnes per minute can create quite a lot of static electricity) However, this does not apply to the average canal boat, I just thought I'd bring it up for the interest.

Edited October 7, 2012 by Radiomariner

[bizzard]

Agree. Complete cobblers. However, there is one slightly exception, and that is to do with static.

All my tankers were required to be have hull to shore earth bonding when transferring volatile cargoe's through flexible hoses. In the old days the flexible hoses did not have an internal earth system. Most modern ones do, however sometimes they fail. It used to be one of my job to check the hoses for earth continuity on a rotational basis, and quite often one or two were not up to scratch,(and heavens knows what the ones provided by the shore were like) thus it had become policy to have the additional earth wire connection. (Pumping oil through a hose at around 100 tonnes per minute can create quite a lot of static electricity) However, this does not apply to the average canal boat, I just thought I'd bring it up for the interest.

When re-fueling. The Altmark and Graf Spee should have had a long earth cable then to reach the shore from mid ocean, i couldn't spot one in the film though, funny they weren't blown to kingdom come.

And there's midair aircraft to aircraft re-fueling too, do they dangle a long wire along the ground to be safe from explosion.

[Radiomariner]

When re-fueling. The Altmark and Graf Spee should have had a long earth cable then to reach the shore from mid ocean, i couldn't spot one in the film though, funny they weren't blown to kingdom come.

And there's midair aircraft to aircraft re-fueling too, do they dangle a long wire along the ground to be safe from explosion.

 

The bonding, for static, in these cases would be between the two craft Dont know about the Altmark and Graf Spee or even the RFA tankers my dad worked on as on those days a lot was not known about the generation of static electricity in hoses. I believe it took some nasty tanker explosions in the 50's/60's before any serious research carried out.

Today hoses used for RAS and I believe RIA are bonded (Electrically conductive along their full length, as are the hoses at you local Petrol station) and I know RFA vessels also rig a bonding wire for RAS.

 

The Altmark and Graf Spee probably had sufficient grounding via the Telephone/telex cables back to Berlin!

[Guest]

Not fuel, and not boat related, but static in pipes which extract sawdust from woodworking machines can be problematic. Sometimes a bare earth wire is located within the pipework.

[bizzard]

The bonding, for static, in these cases would be between the two craft Dont know about the Altmark and Graf Spee or even the RFA tankers my dad worked on as on those days a lot was not known about the generation of static electricity in hoses. I believe it took some nasty tanker explosions in the 50's/60's before any serious research carried out.

Today hoses used for RAS and I believe RIA are bonded (Electrically conductive along their full length, as are the hoses at you local Petrol station) and I know RFA vessels also rig a bonding wire for RAS.

 

The Altmark and Graf Spee probably had sufficient grounding via the Telephone/telex cables back to Berlin!

So i reckon it must be nice and safe on an under sea cable laying ship.

I thought that the giant tanker explosions was due to their tanks vastness, so big that when empty or thereabouts precipitation took place inside and actual thunder storms broke in there and the lightening or static caused em to go off pop.

[John V]

 

I thought that the giant tanker explosions was due to their tanks vastness, so big that when empty or thereabouts precipitation took place inside and actual thunder storms broke in there and the lightening or static caused em to go off pop.

Aided and abetted by the use of Butterworth cleaning hoses

[bizzard]

Aided and abetted by the use of Butterworth cleaning hoses

Butter? I suppose someone could have dropped an Anchor and caused a spark.

 

A couple of giant tankers i think in ballast blew up and disappeared in mid ocean due they say to the vast tanks mini weather systems thunder storm lightening static. The crews apparently always have to use umbrellas with lightening conductors on top when inspecting the oil tanks.

[ditchcrawler]

So i reckon it must be nice and safe on an under sea cable laying ship.

I thought that the giant tanker explosions was due to their tanks vastness, so big that when empty or thereabouts precipitation took place inside and actual thunder storms broke in there and the lightening or static caused em to go off pop.

You can get that with large tanks that have top fill lines even if they are all steel

[bizzard]

You can get that with large tanks that have top fill lines even if they are all steel

And steam water vapour and condensation from you kettles spout is the beginning of precipitation too of course, so better keep an umbrella handy in the boat when making tea or making a stew.

 

Hello, i've got the kettle on and i can't see my ceiling for black Cumulo-Nimbus clouds.

Edited October 7, 2012 by bizzard

[Radiomariner]

So i reckon it must be nice and safe on an under sea cable laying ship.

I thought that the giant tanker explosions was due to their tanks vastness, so big that when empty or thereabouts precipitation took place inside and actual thunder storms broke in there and the lightening or static caused em to go off pop.

 

 

Aided and abetted by the use of Butterworth cleaning hoses

 

 

Butter? I suppose someone could have dropped an Anchor and caused a spark.

 

A couple of giant tankers i think in ballast blew up and disappeared in mid ocean due they say to the vast tanks mini weather systems thunder storm lightening static. The crews apparently always have to use umbrellas with lightning conductors on top when inspecting the oil tanks.

True.I did not wish to go into reasons for tank explosions. I was thinking of a case where a split hose caused explosion and fire at an oil terminal actually ignited without any naked flames or sources of heat in the vicinity.

 

I actually sailed on one of the "sister ships" to one of the ones that explooded. Yes they were in ballast, but were "tank Cleaning" at the time. This was done with a "Butterworth Machine" which is a bit like an oversized upside down lawn sprinkler that sprays up and down as well as round and round using extremely hot water/steam at high pressure. This caused an atmospheric condition inside the tanks causing static discharge similar to lightening, inside the tanks. Not good when combined with vapour from oil residues. Nowadaysn the tanks are filled with inert gas, not only when empty or cleaning, but over the top when loaded. When they were seeking the cause of these big tanker explosions the hoses were also suspect. (Butterworth hoses are also now bonded)

I sailed on a BP Tanker that was built with such an Inert Gas system in the early 60's, another major tanker Co. did not follow suite until nearly ten years and a number of major incidents later. The inert gas by the way, comes from the engine/boiler exhaust all scrubbed, cleaned and cooled

 

Edited to add of course its not true that the crew have lightening conductors on their umberella's. They have spikes on top of their safety helmets

Edited October 7, 2012 by Radiomariner

[bizzard]

True.I did not wish to go into reasons for tank explosions. I was thinking of a case where a split hose caused explosion and fire at an oil terminal actually ignited without and naked flames or sources of heat in the vicinity.

 

I actually sailed on one of the "sister ships" to one of the ones that explooded. Yes they were in ballast, but were "tank Cleaning" at the time. This was done with a "Butterworth Machine" which is a bit like an oversized upside down lawn sprinkler that sprays up and down as well as round and round using extremely hot water/steam at high pressure. This caused an atmospheric condition inside the tanks causing static discharge similar to lightening, inside the tanks. Not good when combined with vapour from oil residues. Nowadaysn the tanks are filled with inert gas, not only when empty or cleaning, but over the top when loaded. When they were seeking the cause of these big tanker explosions the hoses were also suspect. (Butterworth hoses are also now bonded)

I sailed on a BP Tanker that was built with such an Inert Gas system in the early 60's, another major tanker Co. did not follow suite until nearly ten years and a number of major incidents later. The inert gas by the way, comes from the engine/boiler exhaust all scrubbed, cleaned and cooled

 

Edited to add of course its not true that the crew have lightening conductors on their umberella's. They have spikes on top of their safety helmets

Interesting, so we shouldn't get any more explooding. Thanks for that Alan.

[luctor et emergo]

 

Snip..

 

Edited to add of course its not true that the crew have lightening conductors on their umberella's. They have spikes on top of their safety helmets

 

 

It is a little know fact, that that was the original design reason for the German spiked helmet, to avoid casualties on open battlefields, due to ligthingstrikes...

[bizzard]

It is a little know fact, that that was the original design reason for the German spiked helmet, to avoid casualties on open battlefields, due to ligthingstrikes...

I think they were just for embellishment, Finials nicked from park railings. I suppose though if they lost they're bayonets they could put their head down and charge instead.

[ditchcrawler]

 

Edited to add of course its not true that the crew have lightening conductors on their umberella's. They have spikes on top of their safety helmets

Conductive soled boots, None static generating overalls and clothing.

We regularly had vent stacks catch fire in thunder storms and snow storms.

[John V]

...........they were in ballast, but were "tank Cleaning" at the time. This was done with a "Butterworth Machine" which is a bit like an oversized upside down lawn sprinkler that sprays up and down as well as round and round using extremely hot water/steam at high pressure.

 

I believe they were considered excellent for discouraging boarders..... pity they are not available for use near Somalia

 

edited for bad spelliying

Edited October 7, 2012 by John V