TESTING PROTOCOLS

The Mock-up
The Nozzles
The “Fuel”
The Method

In this consumer product testing, conducted in October 2004, we evaluated readily available boat products including inline fuel/air separators, combination deck fill and vents, and fuel computers. With strict orders not to spill one single drop of fuel into the environment, we came up with two different methods of testing these products: first, a landside boat mock-up using a soapy water recipe as our fuel product and second, several friends’ boats, which allowed us to test the inline fuel/air separators and fuel computers on real vessels. Here’s how we did it.

Above: The Mock-Up

The Mock-up: To test these hardware options, we assembled a mock-up of a boat’s hull, deck fill, tank and tank vent according to American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) construction standards. We used certified United States Coast Guard (USCG) components including an 11.5 gallon fuel tank and approved hoses. Then we installed the various deck fills on the “deck” of our mock-up. Below decks, we had good access to easily change the various inline devices. We did not test any combination of devices. In other words, we did not use an inline separator and a combination deck fill and vent at the same time.

After our initial control tests, we substituted the black 5/8” USCG approved vent line with clear vinyl tubing in order to see the bubbly “fuel” venting as it occurred. (Please note that clear tubing is not approved by the Coast Guard for fuel.) Then, to put these products to the real test, we installed each inline fuel/air separator and each fuel computer on motor boats ranging in size from 21’ to 55’. Since the deck-mounted combination deck fill and vent units would have required drilling holes in our friends’ boats (and friends with boats are good friends to keep), those products were only tested on our mock-up.

Above: The Nozzle

The Nozzles: To test our devices, we obtained fuel nozzles from a marina distributor and powered them with an electric pump. We used a standard ¾” nozzle that delivered 10 gallons per minute (gpm) and a high speed 1 ¼” nozzle that delivered 20 gpm to replicate the flows found at the fuel dock.

The “Fuel”: Using soapy water solutions, we formulated realistic substitutes for both gasoline and diesel. After evaluating a variety of soap products, we decided on using car wash soap, which bubbled up initially then settled down rapidly, just like fuel. After many test trials, we settled on adding ¼ teaspoon of car wash soap to 15

Above: The Fuel

gallons of water for “gasoline.” For our “diesel” mixture, we added ½ teaspoon of car wash soap to 15 gallons of water because of diesel’s greater foaming characteristics. It was essential to get these mixes right, or we couldn’t expect the devices we were testing or the automatic shut-off for the fuel nozzles to work properly.

The Method: Some of the products tested were designed for gas, some for diesel and some for either. We only tested products with their intended fuel. To deliver the fuel, we stuck to the same method in test after test. We filled the tank at full speed until the nozzle clicked off. We did not top off. We felt that this method best represented the practices of the majority of boaters, and it allowed us to provide the same fuel delivery speed each time.