Fuel/water separator: "Coast guard inspected vessels must use metal bowls"?

[Rohan]

I have a metal bowl at the bottom of my fuel water separator on my Hunter 36 sailboat. Yet on a few of my friends boats which are similar models, they have clear glass or plastic bowls instead, which I think is much better because then one can actually see if there was any water in there without having to open it up.

But when I tried to google for a clear replacement bowl, I am not able to find them for my specific type (a Racor 230 series, if that matters), and in fact a few web sites put in a disclaimer: "Coast guard inspected vessels must use metal bowls".

Does anyone know why this is? And if it's a safety requirement, then why don't all these devices use metal bowls? Most boats I have seen don't have them, so this is confusing.

[Chotu]

It’s for resistance to fire in the engine room.

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by Rohan

I have a metal bowl at the bottom of my fuel water separator on my Hunter 36 sailboat. Yet on a few of my friends boats which are similar models, they have clear glass or plastic bowls instead, which I think is much better because then one can actually see if there was any water in there without having to open it up.

Does anyone know why this is? And if it's a safety requirement, then why don't all these devices use metal bowls? Most boats I have seen don't have them, so this is confusing.

The larger Racor 500, 900, 1000 use clear bowls which are then protected at the bottom by a metal shield. The shield is indeed about fire, is required, and meant to protect the clear bowl for up to a specific amount of time. (A couple minutes...)

-Chris

[Sailor Sailor]

Originally Posted by Rohan

But when I tried to google for a clear replacement bowl, I am not able to find them for my specific type (a Racor 230 series, if that matters), and in fact a few web sites put in a disclaimer: "Coast guard inspected vessels must use metal bowls".

Does anyone know why this is?

This issue is often misunderstood on this forum.

The threshold question is whether you are a Coast Guard Inspected Vessel. I believe this applies to vessels used for passenger traffic and carrying more than 6 passengers. They are subject to regular, periodic inspections by the USCG and must carry a Certificate of Inspection onboard.

It probably does not apply to you unless you are using your Hunter as a ferry, cruise ship, or water taxi.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by Sailor Sailor

This issue is often misunderstood on this forum.

The threshold question is whether you are a Coast Guard Inspected Vessel. I believe this applies to vessels used for passenger traffic and carrying more than 6 passengers. They are subject to regular, periodic inspections by the USCG and must carry a Certificate of Inspection onboard.

It probably does not apply to you unless you are using your Hunter as a ferry, cruise ship, or water taxi.

Oops.

I just assumed the OP understood that. But maybe the OP does not.

[Rohan]

Originally Posted by Sailor Sailor

This issue is often misunderstood on this forum.

The threshold question is whether you are a Coast Guard Inspected Vessel. I believe this applies to vessels used for passenger traffic and carrying more than 6 passengers.

Oh thank you! That makes sense.

And for fire safety seems a little silly, since in the event of a fire that extensive, the rubber hoses would melt pretty quick.

[ItDepends]

Originally Posted by Rohan

Oh thank you! That makes sense.

And for fire safety seems a little silly, since in the event of a fire that extensive, the rubber hoses would melt pretty quick.

Not if you using properly rated USCG A1 or A2 fuel system hoses. They also have a fire rating, they must survive at least 2 1/2 minute exposure to burning heptane. Which is actually the same test applied to the rest of the approved fuel system components.

I know it’s popular to make fun of the rating and standards organizations, and while they are certainly not perfect, when you really understand all the details, they are rarely “silly,” even a little.

In this case, the resistance to fire required for the hoses and metal bowl (or bowel shield) is there to avoid a catastrophic fuel dump onto a small fire before the automatic fire suppression system has a chance to respond. Seems a good plan to me.

[goboatingnow]

Same with iso standards , a clear bowl isn’t allowed

[ItDepends]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Same with iso standards , a clear bowl isn’t allowed

To be pedantic about it, that’s not correct.

The rules do not prohibit clear bowls on fuel filters. They DO prohibit fuel system components that fail the fire exposure test. Makes no difference if the bowl is clear or not.

[FPNC]

Nothing in the USCG Title 33 Chapter I Subchapter S Part 183 Subpart J Fuel Systems regulations, applies to recreational vessels with a diesel inboard engine. Which can be kind of scary.

[skipperpete]

Those transparent bowls are really hard to burn, this one was on a Colvin Gazelle while the hull was being welded and the fire was enough to burn the bulkhead (repainted in the pic) but the bowl never lost a drop of fuel and in fact wasn’t even immediately replaced during the refit. [ATTACH]267825

[boatpoker]

From the Racor website ...

"Models that include an aluminum bowl or stainless steel shield are UL-listed, American Bureau of Shipping, and USCG accepted. For severe service, all-metal bowls should be specified."

ABYC H-33 Requires these heat shields ...

"33.9 FUEL FILTERS, STRAINERS, AND WATER SEPARATORS
NOTE: Filters, separators, and strainers meeting the requirements of ANSI/UL 1105, “Marine Use Filters and Separators”, comply with these requirements."