How long a tank can remain fully filled?

[Luis H]

As is the case a lot of times, PSI was a company started without an existing need for it services and then went out and convinced the industry that did quite well without PSI that it needed PSI.
Many businesses are formed by convincing a business owner they need the services that business provides.
Sometimes it allows a business to cut costs by either eliminating personnel or in house training by contracting it to an outside source.

Well, in this situation I don’t agree with some of these statements. IMO there is a need for training, basically because there are still too many “pro” VIP inspectors that are not qualified to judge if a tank is good or not. The proof comes from way too many steel tanks that have been condemned when they could be just cleaned and they are fine.

It is true that many of the condemned tanks may be just laziness from the part of the inspector that didn’t want to tumble, but most are just afraid because the tank is “old” or a few other irrational and uneducated reasons.

I am not saying that certification will solve all the problems, but it would be a big step towards uniformity in procedures and standards. It would also increase accountability and at least in theory some increase in education across the dive shop industry would hopefully decrease all the wild individual rules many dive shops have about filling and inspecting tanks.

How many VIP inspectors know the standards to which a cylinder is to be inspected? For example do they even know about CGA C-6 (STANDARDS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF STEEL COMPRESSED GAS CYLINDERS, there is one for inspecting aluminum tanks also)? How many inspectors or shops actually own a copy of the CGA inspection standards?

Many, if not most, inspectors just make a judgment call… it is clean (that in itself is not enough for pass or fail), it looks good, or it has some rust (so they fail it).

We can say that for years it has been good enough, but IMO we are loosing too many good steel 72 to this (uneducated) method of inspection… I hope that I am wrong, on my limited observation of this situation.


When it comes to individuals inspecting their own tanks, in general my observation is they tend to be more careful with their own property and it is limited the amount of harm they can do.

I have definitely observed some fraudulent claims that internal inspections have been perform when they were not, but I have seen that happen by both individuals and shops. Some individuals have done it to save a buck or avoid some inconvenience but I have seen shops do it by either mistakes or they were cutting corners on a busy day. Again, maybe some education about the importance of internal visual inspections may help a bit on this subject.

 

[Luis H]

Oh… about the original subject.
I have bought a few very old tanks that have been stored for many years with air and they all tested to have 21% O2 and there was no smell etc. on any of them.

The oldest one with an original fill was last filled and used in the late 60’s. The 40 year old air was as fresh as if it was pumped yesterday. There was minimal rust on this one (or any of the others).

 

[captain]

Well, in this situation I don’t agree with some of these statements. IMO there is a need for training, basically because there are still too many “pro” VIP inspectors that are not qualified to judge if a tank is good or not. The proof comes from way too many steel tanks that have been condemned when they could be just cleaned and they are fine.

It is true that many of the condemned tanks may be just laziness from the part of the inspector that didn’t want to tumble, but most are just afraid because the tank is “old” or a few other irrational and uneducated reasons.

I am not saying that certification will solve all the problems, but it would be a big step towards uniformity in procedures and standards. It would also increase accountability and at least in theory some increase in education across the dive shop industry would hopefully decrease all the wild individual rules many dive shops have about filling and inspecting tanks.

How many VIP inspectors know the standards to which a cylinder is to be inspected? For example do they even know about CGA C-6 (STANDARDS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF STEEL COMPRESSED GAS CYLINDERS, there is one for inspecting aluminum tanks also)? How many inspectors or shops actually own a copy of the CGA inspection standards?

Many, if not most, inspectors just make a judgment call… it is clean (that in itself is not enough for pass or fail), it looks good, or it has some rust (so they fail it).

We can say that for years it has been good enough, but IMO we are loosing too many good steel 72 to this (uneducated) method of inspection… I hope that I am wrong, on my limited observation of this situation.


When it comes to individuals inspecting their own tanks, in general my observation is they tend to be more careful with their own property and it is limited the amount of harm they can do.

I have definitely observed some fraudulent claims that internal inspections have been perform when they were not, but I have seen that happen by both individuals and shops. Some individuals have done it to save a buck or avoid some inconvenience but I have seen shops do it by either mistakes or they were cutting corners on a busy day. Again, maybe some education about the importance of internal visual inspections may help a bit on this subject.

In respect to saving tanks there may be some benefit but in respect to safety I don't think much is gained. Even to the untrained eye a lot of rust and pitting would probably fail the tank there by possibly increasing safety even if it may be able to be saved with a tumble.
The inspection process is to weed out tanks that are considered to be unsafe not necessarily to reduce the number of tanks failed. Sort of like the saying about justice, it is better that some of the guilty go free than to imprison the one who is innocent.

The company I worked for had a policy that all employees be trained in the use positive pressure scba used in an emergency. The common method of determining if the mask fit your face and did not leak was to put it on, hold your hand over the inhalation hose and try to inhale. This worked for the first 25 + years I was there.
Then a company was contracted to do fit testing. It involved a 15 minute test of breathing with the mask in various positions, doing various exercises, speaking, laughing, frowning, etc while hooked up to a monitor to detect any leaks. If any leak was detected in any part of the test it had to be done over with a different mask even though we were not issued any personal mask, you grabbed the one closest to you in an emergency.

More than likely a former employee of a company saw an opportunity to offer a service to his former company and other companies that the company may not want to do in house for whatever reasons. Good old American capitalism at work.

 

[Davidstealey3]

you should be familiafr with the CGA standars, along with section 49 of the CFR. as thesae do apply yo the inspection, and transport of cylinders.

and luis is right, most shops dont have a copy of the CGA standards, buy when one volume can cost you over $100 and there are five or six manuels they have that are useful to you it does get spendy.

someone else mentioned that you dont have to be a certified mechanic to work on your own car, but does a new driver always go and pull the motor out, tear it apart to rebuild it, and replace it with out someone who knows what they are doing to help or guide them? more than likely i would say not.

and if that is not a reason enough to do it how about this. THIS IS LIFE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT. do you trust what you have done to still use this tank, or give it to a family member to use?

as for the reg comment, if you dont know what should or should not be replaced, or how to take it apart and put it bact together the same way, you could damage the internal parts and not know it, and then that is a danger waiting to happen.

just cause someone on here says its easy, dosent mean to go ahead and do it. when in doubt ask, or take it to a pro, dont be cheep and dangerous. no one wants to have to go looking for a body

 

[Randy43068]

you worry too much........

you should be familiafr with the CGA standars, along with section 49 of the CFR. as thesae do apply yo the inspection, and transport of cylinders.

and luis is right, most shops dont have a copy of the CGA standards, buy when one volume can cost you over $100 and there are five or six manuels they have that are useful to you it does get spendy.

someone else mentioned that you dont have to be a certified mechanic to work on your own car, but does a new driver always go and pull the motor out, tear it apart to rebuild it, and replace it with out someone who knows what they are doing to help or guide them? more than likely i would say not.

and if that is not a reason enough to do it how about this. THIS IS LIFE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT. do you trust what you have done to still use this tank, or give it to a family member to use?

as for the reg comment, if you dont know what should or should not be replaced, or how to take it apart and put it bact together the same way, you could damage the internal parts and not know it, and then that is a danger waiting to happen.

just cause someone on here says its easy, dosent mean to go ahead and do it. when in doubt ask, or take it to a pro, dont be cheep and dangerous. no one wants to have to go looking for a body

 

[Luis H]

In respect to saving tanks there may be some benefit but in respect to safety I don't think much is gained. Even to the untrained eye a lot of rust and pitting would probably fail the tank there by possibly increasing safety even if it may be able to be saved with a tumble.

I agree with that, in most cases, but there are exceptions. One example is a “pro” VIP inspector may look at a tank that a customer tumbled (or had tumbled at another shop). The tank could look great, but have a small line of pitting that may look insignificant or it could have a single pit that is too deep. There are specific criteria’s to pass or fail a cylinder. Just because it is clean is not a guaranty of passing. Again, my observation is that most inspectors have never seen a copy of CGA C-6.

IMO, removing perfectly good tanks out of service does not improve safety in any possible.

Rust does not condemn a cylinder… pits condemn a cylinder. To truly condemn a cylinder all the rust should be removed in order to be able to inspect for pits.
Rust will fail a tank. There is a big difference between failing and condemning. A fail tank can be serviced, but not one that has been condemn.

The inspection process is to weed out tanks that are considered to be unsafe not necessarily to reduce the number of tanks failed. Sort of like the saying about justice, it is better that some of the guilty go free than to imprison the one who is innocent.

Actually, IMO the 5 year inspection (requalification) process is to weed out the unsafe cylinders. The yearly inspection is to catch rust (or contaminants, etc.) early and resolve the issue before the cylinder is harmed beyond repair. Again, IMO, this is the reason that the DOT requires the 5 year requalification versus the yearly inspection.

The yearly inspection does result in safer tanks just because any harm due to rust can be catch early (and clean early), which results in less likely of a pitted tank showing up for the 5 year requalification. Not allowing pits to grow (by removing early rust) will save a cylinder and make for a much straight forward VIP during the 5 year requalification (which of course includes the hydro test).

BTW, (I don’t want to open a can of worms here, but an interesting observation): the yearly VIP for Scuba cylinders has been a recommendation by the CGA, which is as close to a requirement as it gets without actually been a law.

More than likely a former employee of a company saw an opportunity to offer a service to his former company and other companies that the company may not want to do in house for whatever reasons. Good old American capitalism at work.

Well… I am sure you don’t have an issue with that.

 

[Davidstealey3]

you worry too much........

i worry to mu ch, maybe, but this coming from a guy who's profile says no logged dives not certified.

i just want the general public to be informed of why it is done. if eveyone just did their own tanks, and more accidents happened, do you think it would be a recomendation then, or a law? and how much do you think it would cost ? and by the way for those that dont know, there are only two organizations that are recognized by the CGA, and PSI is one of them. SDI and the other SCUBA specialty courses are unrecognized, and that would not be good in a court case, even though they use the PSI guidelines for the course itsself

if we are going to keep going back and forth with this, we should start a new topic because we are way off topic from the original question.

 

[Luis H]

i worry to mu ch, maybe, but this coming from a guy who's profile says no logged dives not certified.

i just want the general public to be informed of why it is done. if eveyone just did their own tanks, and more accidents happened, do you think it would be a recomendation then, or a law? and how much do you think it would cost ? and by the way for those that dont know, there are only two organizations that are recognized by the CGA, and PSI is one of them. SDI and the other SCUBA specialty courses are unrecognized, and that would not be good in a court case, even though they use the PSI guidelines for the course itsself

if we are going to keep going back and forth with this, we should start a new topic because we are way off topic from the original question.

Badges… we don’t need no stinking badges.


Please do not confuse knowledge with badges…


And I do agree with Randy… you worry too much...
:lol:

But you are right... this is way off topic.

 

[Davidstealey3]

not worried, just concernede for all the uninformed people out there who think this board is like the holy grail for all things dive related.

and since no one else is going to do it, i will start a new topic here and in the DIY repairs

 

[WD8CDH]

basic question here I guess:
if an HP tank is fully filled (3400 psi), how long can it remain there and is it ok to use it after a long period ?
thx

Most likely it is OK after a very long period ( I have used 40 year old air) but you really don't know for sure unless you test the air. Fortunatly, it is highly unlikely that you need to do anything other than check for % O2. Water can cause a loss of O2 over time in a steel tank but any other contaminant was bad air in the first place, not a time related problem.