search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
vessels). Many of these engines are of relatively low power output, and there are thousands of them around UK waterways.


The reduction of aromatic content in the new standards of fuel is known to affect the performance of the rubber and synthetic seal compounds used in pump seals and flexible fuel pipes. Inclusion of bio-diesel also has an effect upon seal materials. Fuel pumps which have not been recently replaced or re-built should be fitted with new seals, should fuel seepage be seen to occur. It is advisable that flexible portions of fuel pipework and system seals should be renewed in any case, as is good engineering practice, when they are more than a few years old. The Standards organisation responsible for flexible fuel pipes is addressing compatibility with bio fuels.


The discussions and consultation process has provided beneficial dialogue between inland and maritime operators, engine manufacturers and the fuel companies. Through this medium, further advice has been made available, including the avoidance of copper piping in vessels’ fuel systems – especially where engines bypass or recirculate a high proportion of fuel (such as in modern common-rail engines), due to copper’s effect in reducing the fuel’s anti-oxidation and other stabilising properties. This advice stands irrespective of whether the fuel is distillate or contains biodiesel.


The problems of MBC in storage tanks have been described, as has the increased risk of MBC when bio-diesel is blended with fossil diesel. But if MBC does develop, it can quickly infect the entire fuel system. The resulting jelly-like mass of biological debris will soon begin to block pipework, valves and filters and could result in sudden loss of power, leading to potential navigational danger and risk to life and public safety.


Significant changes to the Sulphur content and additives in marine fuels have also been reported to cause


changes to the acidity of the fuel and its combustion products. However, these effects are most prominent in seagoing ships burning residual fuels, where sulphur reduction for emission control areas at sea require very great changes and an acidity balance to be achieved by changing the lubricating oil base number. The smaller ships’ engine manufacturers and fuel refiners advise that a change from 1,000ppm sulphur to 10ppm sulphur did not affect acidity beyond the scope of the currently specified good quality lubricating oils.


Similarly, it is suspected that changes to the aromatic content of the fuel may have caused changes to the combustion process and its products.


However, extensive operational trials on a range of older rail engines, similar in type and engine power to those larger inland waters vessels, have demonstrated that – given good and regular normal maintenance - no ill effects were observed over a number of thousands of engine running hours, when burning ULS fuels. (See the Railways Safety and Standards Board report on engine testing, detailed at the References).


A separate trial on burning ULS fuel, in inland waterways vessels was undertaken by IVR, a consortium of IW vessel insurers with in-house technical expertise, in the Netherlands. Again, no ill effects were reported.


So we should be reasonably sure that current, new and older engines should be capable of running on BS2869:2010 fuel. However, caution is required with regard to ordering, handling and storage. Vessels’ systems should be examined for presence of cop per piping and, wherever possible, such material replaced with suitable marine- grade stainless steel. The condition, means of connection and material for fuel flexible hoses should also be examined and wherever seepage or leaks are suspected or may be at risk, the hoses should be replaced with the appropriate grade. While other risks may


present to the operator, engineer or surveyor, these are the areas in which most concern should arise.


Nevertheless, it should be recognised that the majority of owners and operators of the vessels covered by this legislation, Inland Waterways Vessels and Recreational Craft, are not qualified engineers or boatmen, but ordinary members of the public. As professional engineers and surveyors, there is shared a duty to help advise our clients or fellow operators of the advantages but also of the potential pitfalls and how best to avoid them.


FAME-FREE ULTRA-LOW SULPHUR DIESEL FUEL


The best solution may be achieved by ensuring that, where the regulations apply, ULS fuel that is free from bio-diesel (“FAME-free”,) is embarked and used. During and since the negotiations with DfT, the IMarEST and others have pressed the safety case of risks associated with bio-diesel and potential MBC in maritime and IW use. In response, the DfT and some fuel refiners, blenders and distributors have made available the supply of BS2869:2010 ULS fuel that is FAME-free.


Engineers and surveyors should advise operators to enquire of their fuel supplier, marina or other distributor about the exact detail of their fuel specification. When “Red Diesel” was considered “just the same”, such assiduousness was rarely necessary. However, with the risks associated with bio- diesel, close enquiry is the more important. Where suppliers do not know what they are selling, then they should be avoided. It is highly recommended that supply of FAME-free fuel be demanded, in writing if necessary and suppliers’ records of specification inspected, prior to uplift of fuel. As an added precaution, vessel fleet, marina and similar operators could request a sealed and certified fuel sample with each delivery, until they are satisfied that standards are consistent with their requirements and these recommendations.


The Report • December 2017 • Issue 82 | 57


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80