Cell Phone Spark 1

[chicopee]

Is there enough spark energy generated in cell phones to ignite air ladden w/ gasoline fume while cars are being refueled? Just read an article relating several incidents on this topic. I can not seem to believe it.

 

[melone]

It is IMPOSSIBLE.... period!

 

[itsmoked]

melone; There are several discussions going on here so I'm not sure what you are referring too.

####################################

I think the general answer to the cell-phone-igniting-a-gasoline-fire while fueling your car at the local self serve is as follows.

1) Yes! A cell phone could ignite gas fumes [red]if[/red] it is held next to a dribbling gas nozzle and it [red]malfunctions[/red] in an explosive manner.

2) How often does a cellphone explosively malfunction? Maybe 20 a year in the world and how often does it happen during a fueling operation? Not very often. 1.92x10^-29times per year.

3) A car is more likely to ignite the gasoline vapors than a cellphone.

4) The RF could not come close to igniting anything.

5) People who get ignited are those who get in and out of a fueling vehicle. Nothing to do with a correctly functioning cell phone.
####################################

waross; Very good question about the gov.. One I cannot at present answer. So far I have only mated the generator to the engine in a vertical over-under chassis via a Gates cogged power belt. I hand throttled it for 10 minutes.
I'll probably work up a microcontroller servo system.

Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-

http://www.flaminsystems.com

 

[frankiee]

Interesting discussion. I am richer in knowledge because of it. I have been and will again work aboard and in the tanks of a fuel barge which carries 18,800,000 liters of gasoline. When in the tanks with all that vapor (empty) I think of little things such as: do I have my cell phone on me (against regulations), do I have an intrinsically safe flashlight with me (as per regulations), is anybody taking a smoke break in the tank beside me (against regulations).

After a look at the net and various sites, I personally believe that it is possible for a cell phone to malfunction in a way to ignite gasoline vapors under certain conditions. Although this would be a remote possibility, I prefer not to take that chance in such a large tank where the chance of survival of myself, and the team I am with, is zero.
I think safety is about doing what we can. We can have intrinsically safe radios and flashlights, so we do.
We can have a regulation that prohibits people carrying cigarettes and lighters in their pockets, so we do.
We do what we can to eliminate all possibility of accidental death but there are limits. I don't think a regulation prohibiting spark ignition vehicles near the gasoline refilling station is very rational (although we have this regulation on board the tanker) or even a simple regulation where a qualified refueller does the fill up in an approved manner (Would be complains of raised costs).
It is hard enough to get people to quit smoking at refuelling stations. I have never seen or heard of a local incidence of a fuel fire from a local station in my town and I don't want one to happen when I am around the station.
I think that it is a good guideline to try to keep cellphones away from the nozzle of the gas pump. I personally don't mind a little inconvenience to ensure the safety of others.

What about a half way such as asking for cell phones to be kept in the vehicle while refueling.

 

[itsmoked]

Interesting stuff frankiee; You must have some really big kahunas cuz you could not pay me enough to enter a gasoline tank.

I believe the cell phone gas thing is like so much other stuff in our world. There is some hazard associated with just about anything. Everything we do has a risk of killing us. Drinking from a water tap can provide poison or that fatal germ. Taking a shower. Watching a TV. Riding in a motor vehicle. And talking on a cell phone while standing in front of a (now days) sealed vacuum pumped gasoline nozzle. You just have to make that personal decision of what is "too risky for me". I have made the decision that with the sealed vacuum gas nozzle and the chance of my cell phone explosively failing while I'm standing there, the odds of disaster are so long as to be down in the 'noise'. I'm not going to worry about it.

Far more important in all this is just when to use a cell phone and when not. Worrying about not using it while fueling then using it as you drive away out into the streets while driving is a hazard most assuredly 'not down in the noise'. The same could probably be said for operating the gas nozzle, the hazard is doing something wrong while pumping the gas due to a cell phone distraction (CPD - SeaPeaDee).

Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-

http://www.flaminsystems.com

 

[IRstuff]

The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) reported a recall of Kyocera cellphone batteries that had 4 reported cases of catastrophic failure with sufficient heat generated to cause one minor burn injury:

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/cpsr_nws33.pdf

(Page 11)

Additionally, FMA indicates a lithium ignition risk if the battery casing is ruptured:

http://www.fmadirect.com/support_docs/item_1197.pdf

(Page 3)

So while the risk of either is still seemingly remote, they are clearly non-zero.



TTFN

 

[VEBill]

frankiee: Imagine you're in that fumed-filled fuel barge tank, but with half a dozen cars and or motorcycles coming, stopping, starting and going every few minutes. Do you think that you'll be worried about your cell phone with all that traffic in the fuel barge with you?

Most of the 'Exploding Cell Phone' arguments only make sense in the complete absense of cars. In the vicinity of a gasoline pump, that's nonsense.

 

[IRstuff]

A normally operating vehicle with a distributor has a tortuous path to get to the spark within the distributor. An electronic ignition won't even have that.

But worn or frayed spark plug wire could surely generate a big fat spark. So if you arrange to spray some gas into the engine compartment AND have a faulty wire set...

TTFN

 

[VEBill]

Cars igniting gas stations is extremely unlikely.

Cell phones - a thousand (a million?) times less likely.

 

[Comcokid]

Lets follow the logic of IRstuff posting of cell phone battery explosions.

How likely is it that a cell phone battery would explode? How likely is it that a person would actually be using the cell phone at the time the battery exploded? How likely is it that someone would be actually filming the person at the very time that the cell phone battery exploded?.

Put these three conditions together and you would probably say it is extremely remote at best. Yet, it has already happened. I saw the video on a 20/20 or 60-minutes type news program a few months ago.

There was an incident about 4 years ago when the vibator of a cell phone cause a flash fire at an oil well (in Texas?) Several people heard the vibrator immediately before the fire. Several people were burned. I wish I had kept a copy of the article. This is no doubt a more hazardous situation that a consumer gas station, but it involves the same elements. There was also a situation on a off-shore oil platform a few years ago involving a cell phone. However online I can find references to the incident but no details.

Like I said earlier - "Stuff Happens"

 

[melone]

I design cell phones for a living. The vibrator voltage is not enough to generate a spark. The only way the cell phone could ignite gas fumes is if something catastrophic were to happen to the battery, i.e. explode due to an internal short.

 

[VEBill]

Comcokid - your latest argument appears logical, but because it ignores the tendency of cars (obviously far more dangerous than cell phones) to congregate around gasoline filling stations, it is meaningless.

CAR CARS CARS - don't forget the CARS.

Reminds me of commercial airline travel and nail clippers.

 

[felixc]

Lawyer solutions:
- force a ground wire between the car and the fuel pump before fueling, like in airports.
- or force the cars to drop a chain down to the ground upon ignition off.
- ban synthetic clothes like microfiber, goretex, nylon, fortrel, to reduce the odds of developng static charges.
- ban women customers in self-serve gas stations
- ban Renaults from US territory (oops it's already done, Keith you're an outlaw)
- install a big post sign telling people to discharge themselves on the fuel pump frame before filling up
- force people to put a ground-connected conductive bracer while fueling.
- ban common sense, not enough people have it.

 

[itsmoked]

[green]"- ban common sense, not enough people have it."[/green]
([red]and it cuts into lawyer income.[/red])

[green]"Keith you're an outlaw"[/green] [red]No surprise there![/red]

Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-

http://www.flaminsystems.com

 

[Comcokid]

VE1BLL - I would talk a lot more about the CARS, but this thread is titled "Cell Phone Spark"

And Melone, I do Intrinsic Safety, and devices that mount on those gas tanks at filling stations as part on my engineering work. I once gave a talk to a large group of Boeing sensor Engineers on a new fuel measurement technology just a few weeks after TWA flight 800. I was barraged with questions and comments from a group of what (at the time) seemed to me to be some rather stressed engineers. Two weeks after this presentation, it came out in the news that the focus of the investigation had changed from a missle and to the center fuel tank! I've never forgotten that experience and the way the engineers seem to stress that even the published conservitive standards and that passed tests were not even good enough! The inductance in the windings a vibrator motor alone exceeds safe limits - not to mention that this inductance is fed by brushes running a contact - a V = L*di/dt that in a ideal circuit sends V to infinity when the contacts bounce or switch and i becomes discontinuous.

Like I said - "Stuff Happens" It's only a matter of how much risk we are willing to accept in our society. As it is, if you are pumping gas into your car, you are much more likely to be hit by a drunk driving into the station for another bottle of beer than a cell phone to ignite the fuel vapors. But just because it's less likely does not mean that it will not happen.

 

[melone]

True, but just because the probablity is non-0, doesn't mean that it is "risky". An asteroid could come crashing down to the earth, and knock your keys out of your hand. Then, your flying keys could strike the metal body in the vicinity of your gas tank. This would then ignite the fumes. However, nobody seems too concerned about this scenario, because it is unlikely (but not impossible). I don't have the actual probabilities of each scenario, but my gut tells me they are on the same order of magnitude..... VERY unlikely.

 

[OperaHouse]

This sure proves my theory!

"The number of replies is inversely proportional to the number of components required in providing a solution."

 

[itsmoked]

Yeah, heading for the "Water level down the hole" length thread.

Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-

http://www.flaminsystems.com

 

[ruggedscot]

What if ?!

What if you answer the phone while you are filling the car ?

What if the battery connections are lose or that vibrator aint quite right ?

What if there is enough fuel vapour around your phone ?

What if that spark ignites the fuel ?

What if you get a fright and drop the flaming nozzel and it sprays you with gas ?

What if your clothes catch alight ?

What if the burning fuel finds a way to reach those under ground tanks that are partially full as its mid way between fill ups ?

What if the fuel vapour ignites and blows the tank out the ground ?

What if you die from your injuries ?

Life is full of unknowns - you may answer that phone tell your wife your 10 minutes from home go pay for the gas and then drive home with nothing happening.

BUT What if ?

A risk has been identified an attempt has been made to try and limit this risk. But I can tell you if some schmuk tried to answer the phone beside me while I was filling up my car he would require some surgery to remove the phone. Its not safe - its been proved that its not safe so why have this discussion about it being a risk or not. Id prefer not to take that chance.

Its like mobiles near to UPS units - now Im talking big uns, say 2MW rated its been shown that the phone radiated rf can have an issue with them. Ive been beside one of those units when its tried to mesh with the utility power unsyncronised - not a great place to be and I can say that ones trousers ended up heavily soiled. Ive seen the effect so if someone now tells me not to use a phone near them as they dont like it then I will not use a phone near them.

Like petrol pumps I know what can happen Ive seen the video I know that fire hurts and an explosion could kill, I like life so Im not going to go and risk this by having a conversation...... while I fill up the car.

Rugged

 

[VEBill]

Zoom out by an order of magnitude and you'll notice the cars. The illogic can be suffocating when the slightly-larger picture is consistently (intentionally?) ignored. In other words: "What if the guy next to me is done filling up and ~gasp~ he starts his car to leave while I'm still pumping fuel?"

[And perhaps, "What if the 'schmuk' with the call phone has studied martial arts for 26 years?" Now there's a risk, especially if you're wearing a kilt. ]

A person's reaction to a 'brazillion-to-one' risk item, when surrounded by hundreds of million-to-one risk items, is....revealing.

 

[melone]

ruggedscot, show me EXACTLY where it has been "proved that its not safe". We must strive to prevent emotional reaction to facts (threats of physical violence don't really add to the persuasivness of your argument).

I don't think that anyone would disagree that the probability of a component failure (battery rupture, EL driver malfunction causing a spark, etc.) is NOT 0. However, the likelihood of this even happening is VIRTUALLY 0. You are MUCH more likely to be ignited by static electricity (entering your vehicle while fueling, not turning off the engine, etc.,

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/05/earlyshow/main706202.shtml,

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/weekly/aa062399.htm,

...), than a cell phone component failure. Proof of this has been documented on several TV shows, Mythbusters, 20/20, etc.. I have not seen any reason for these shows to have a vested interest in passing bad information regarding the safety of cell phones at gas stations. Obviously, I could be wrong, but it isn't readily apparent to me.

Finally, there are regulations that we (cell phone designers) must meet regarding the safety of our products. Being a spark generation device is UNACCEPTABLE!