Aluminum tanks

[diver 85]

Aluminum 80s cost $140 without valves. Why put yourself or anyone at risk with a 15-20 year old tank? I do the inspections, and we have tanks with the old alloy at the shop. But honestly, given the pretty slack methods many shops have for inspecting tanks, I wouldn't want to be the fill operator filling one of those old tanks.

There have been reports of numerous tank ruptures. I think there was one in Rhode Island this year. Just not worth it.

why not get rid of all vehicles, I hear many more humans(& dogs) die from automobile accidents each year---(1 last year???---how many refills were done last year??---ALOT)......A little overkill, excuse the pun, here.............GEAUX TIGERS......

 

[Scared Silly]

To supplement what Auqamaster has said. Here is the advisory (issued sometime ago) and the DOT regs.

http://hazmat.dot.gov/pubs/reports/cylinder/3al_advisory.pdf

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/pdf/E6-14255.pdf

I would suggest that folks print these out for reference. Also note that these regs apply only to scuba cylinders. I have a CO2 cylinder that is made from 6351 and an eddy current test is not required (I had one done anyways).

PS I for one would like to see a sticky on this subject.

 

[oxyhacker]

I don't know where that list came from, but the last two items could benefit from having the word "aluminum" added!

* All other scuba tanks made in the US before February 1990 (except Catalina).
* All scuba tanks not made in the US.

 

[Scared Silly]

Good catch Vance this is why I strongly recommend that people reference the two notices I posted. To the best of my knowledge these are the ONLY two documents that need to be referenced. This is not to knock what Aquamaster has written, as he mentioned he and a few others have responded correctly to questions regarding this subject ad nauseum. Many others have not.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

I don't know where that list came from, but the last two items could benefit from having the word "aluminum" added!

It's a good catch, but it is a bit redundant. "Aluminum" is ommitted in the last two as the tank material is implied. Besdies no one ever made a 6351-T6 alloy steel tank.

I could not find the original thread and post with the material pulled from the advisory circular with the associated link (as there are a LOT of threads on this subject), so the original link is appreciated.

 

[WD8CDH]

Since the new regulation only requires eddy current testing every 5 years, are many shops requiring eddy current testing on each anual visual?

 

[DA Aquamaster]

As far as I know the every year eddy current inspection will remain a scuba industry standard just like the VIP.

The annual VIP for scuba tanks is also just a scuba industry standard - a visual inspection is only required by law when the cylinder is requalified (hydro test and visual inspection) every 5 years.

 

[Tienuts]

This is a superb example of the urban legend and "the sky is falling" unjustified and totally unsupported fears that develop around this issue. The incident occurred in 1998 and while tragic it resulted in the loss of about half of the fill operators hand - it did not cut him in half. Priror to that date there had been 10 or so failures related to suspected SLC cracks in 6351-T6 tanks - out of about 12 million 6351 T-6 tanks produced for scuba, SCBA and medical O2 service over the preceding 20 years. So at that point the odds of encountering a tank that may fail were literally 1 in 1,000,000. Since the implementation of eddy current testing nearly 8 years ago there have been zero failures.

Hey Mr. Know it all - it was indeed a fatality, and while I was over-exaggerating saying the fill op was cut in half, she was indeed killed, and several others severely injured. Here is the thread on it: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/accidents-incidents/65766-accident-cave-excursions.html

Now I could care less if you fill one, but I certainly wouldn't, nor would I ask one of my fill operators to do it.

 

[magicwanz]

...So at that point the odds of encountering a tank that may fail were literally 1 in 1,000,000...

The Luxfer link is interesting though - 45 million 6351 tanks made, 20 failures, 12 in scuba tanks, of the 10 scyba tank failures involving SLC issues, 60% are non injury incidents (when 6351 SLC failures occur, the tank frequently leaks but does not explode.)

WOW!!! I don't think I'm playing with these odds, to me its just not worth saving $140 :no Good luck with that DA...

 

[magicwanz]

Implying Luxfer is irresponsible and prefers profit over safety is slanderous. It's also seriously flawed thinking as they would be the ones that gain the most from selling new AL tanks to replace those removed from service.

Ummmmmm..... reconsider the profit margin for a LDS on 2 hydros over 5 years vs. the sale of a new tank. The profit margin is far greater on the hydros than the sale. Did someone say "flawed thinking?" Perhaps just maybe the LDS IS thinking safety first to take a lower margin of profit?

Given a tendency in Florida for some operators to fill 3000 psi service pressure aluminum tanks to 4000 psi, this may account for Florida sites having 3 of the injury related SLC failures. I guess if a shop is going to do massive (and illegal) overfills on aluminum tanks, they may prefer to do it with 6061-T6 alloy.

Did someone say earlier that "Implying [] is irresponsible and prefers profit over safety is slanderous"? Ummmmmm....