DOT Tank Condemnation

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

sbloomer:
Has anyone here actually had any of the Luxfer 6351 tanks fail the eddy test? I have two which are over 15 years old with more than 2000 fill cycles each, and they passed their eddy test fine.

Just curious to see. I know some in South Africa have recently failed, but the numbers seem very low, like less than 0.1%.


I'm a PSI Inspector, and I've condemned 4 tanks made by Luxfer out of the 6351 alloy myself. They had neck cracks. Some of the cracks were miniscule, others were very large.
 
Last year, at my former job, we had over 15 cylinders fail visual inspection. The year before that, it was 10 or 12, and the year before that, it was about the same. So, yes, they do fail, they will fail eventually.
 
I have failed 3 tanks in the last month.

All of them had cracks in the neck covering more than 10 threads.

I consider AL tanks that are getting close to 20 years old to be generally unsafe anyways. But the eddy test is a god send for those cracks that can't be readily seen.

But I probably only have that opinion because I am an evil LDS emplyee who only wants to sell you a new tank.

For the record I have 3 nice piggy banks that are Luxfers from 78, 80 and 83. Two at home and one at the office. And they passed the eddy. But I don't need any more risk in my life. I already enter an environment that is inherintly hostile to humans. You do the math.
:)
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom