How to identify a Luxfer 6351 tank?

[mtndew2112]

This just goes to prove the hysteria and BS that has gone through the industry without fact. Re-testers like this cause a lot of unnecessary problems.

Thank you mtndew2110 for keeping us posted !!!!

I take it this was a complement ?

The unnecessary problem is and is what your industry has demanded -is proper testing requirements.

As for software issue
I still can't get anyone to understand the importance of it as the regulations quickly turn the issue back on to the tester. But how can the Fed's require use of a technical instruments if it has problems telling what is and what isn't a crack.

 

[Leadking]

I take it this was a complement ?

The unnecessary problem is and is what your industry has demanded -is proper testing requirements.

As for software issue
I still can't get anyone to understand the importance of it as the regulations quickly turn the issue back on to the tester. But how can the Fed's require use of a technical instruments if it has problems telling what is and what isn't a crack.

It is a compliment! You are providing FACTS and it is appreciated.

 

[WD8CDH]

Regardless of new software or not, it has been long known that eddy current testing on 6061 alloy can give false readings. Since eddy current testing of 6061 tanks IS NOT a DOT requirement, you should at least get reimbursed for the improperly condemned 6061-T6 tanks.

 

[doc8425]

I just trashed two AL tanks (one was Luxfer and the other was USD) that were manufactered prior to June '88. I was attempting to get them in hydro but the shop wouldn't touch them. One was still in hydro at the time. Nothing wrong with the tanks and they had been in use frequently.

Also had to trash two steel Aqalung 72's that were made overseas some time ago due to the lack of a DOT stamp on them.

 

[marchand]

Also had to trash two steel Aqalung 72's that were made overseas some time ago due to the lack of a DOT stamp on them.

Thats funny, I'm pretty sure that there is a provision for putting the DOT stamps on the tanks...

That said I have six faber 12L 300BAR tanks that don't have DOT stamps that I use all the time.

 

[Leadking]

Thats funny, I'm pretty sure that there is a provision for putting the DOT stamps on the tanks...

That said I have six faber 12L 300BAR tanks that don't have DOT stamps that I use all the time.

There is no provision I am aware of to re-stamp a cylinder for DOT qualification.
Also it is against regulations (OSHA) to commercially fill any high pressure cylinder not rated by DOT or ASME.

 

[WD8CDH]

Thats funny, I'm pretty sure that there is a provision for putting the DOT stamps on the tanks...

Yes, but it involves testing at least two of them to distruction.:shocked2:
oh...and they all have to be from the same batch.

 

[FredT]

The only legal way to use non-DOT tanks in the US I know of is to have your own compressor, dive off the boat moored at your back porch, and never drive with them on the roads with more than 40psig in them.

IF you can get a hard copy of the retest specs from the country where the tanks are made you may be able to get the hydroed in the US, but as it may put the retester at legal risk with our govt most won't play.

 

[WD8CDH]

They can be legally hydro'd, just not legally stamped.

 

[Leadking]

A number of the vintage scuba guys want to know their tanks are safe but do not want current hydro stamps on them. They get a safety check w/o documentation.