Hydro not good enough for an older tank?

[Compressor]

I took a tank that was hydroed (elsewhere) yesterday to a scuba shop today for VIP. The tank is an old steel tank about 30 years old. Its a low pressure (2200PSI) tank made by Kidde or Fabre. The store tech told me that the tank is too old based on standards by one of the folks who set standards for VIP testing. (I don't know if it was PSI or someone else). Since the tank had passed hydro and I've been a long time customer, he would VIP it this year but that I should think about abandoning this particular tank.

Opinions are welcome as this is the first time I come across this issue with any of my steel tanks. I did not sense any issue about the tank being hydroed someplace else. It was done somewhere else because the turnaround time would be short.

 

[Bigd2722]

I would ask for his reference source. This doesn't sound right to me. I could understand this if it was an aluminum tank, but I doubt if any reputable resource would suggest replacement just based on age of a steel tank

 

[Luis H]

The reason it passed hydro per the licensed DOT facility and in accordance with CFR 49 (Code of Federal Regulations) is because there is absolutely nothing wrong with and old steel tank. As long as they are not rusted, don't have any visible damage, and they pass hydro, they are good to be used as pressure vessels.

There are DOT steel cylinders in service that date back to the early 1900's. Most of them were built under the older 3A pressure vessel steel code. The information is covered under the Codes of Federal Regulations.
I personally own about a dozen steel 72 cylinders that are from the 70's and some from the 60's (they were built under DOT code 3AA). If you look at the neck of your cylinder you will probably see a 3AA stamped on it.

My oldest steel cylinders are from 1957.

There is no age limit on steel cylinders.

Note: the information mentioned above is all based in well known facts that can be easily confirmed. The CFR codes are all available on line and anyone can download them.


Since you were also asking for an opinion: IMO maybe you should find a dive shop with more knowledgeable employees. As an alternative, you could try to educate the ones in that shop.

 

[akdeepdiver]

As a PSI instructor, a hydrotester, and a diver, I can clearly state that Neither the DOT, CGA, nor PSI have ever held the position that a solid wall cylinder (Aluminum or steel) should be pulled from service based on age alone. PSI supports the federal regulations that state as long as the cylinder meets visual inspection criteria and passes hydrostatic retest it may remain in service. The only exception is certain fiber wrapped (composite) cylinders that have a service life of 15, 20, or 30 years as stated in the Special Permit/Exemption that they were issued under by the DOT.

 

[Scared Silly]

Go back into the store and ask for the owner. Explain that his tech is so full of crap that he makes the Hudson River look like Caribbean blue water and that as a long time customer while you appreciate the tech doing VIP this year that you expect that next year it will be VIP again without the manure.

 

[redacted]

But, just like the "bad" aluminum tanks rejected by many, perhaps most; a fill provider has the prerogative of rejecting any tank they choose as long as it is not based on a federally protected demographic. It's not like dive ops don't routinely make **** up and get away with it.

 

[Compressor]

Great information fellows. I really appreciate it.

 

[rhwestfall]

But, just like the "bad" aluminum tanks rejected by many, perhaps most; a fill provider has the prerogative of rejecting any tank they choose as long as it is not based on a federally protected demographic. It's not like dive ops don't routinely make **** up and get away with it.

Yes, but then the store personnel should so state "it is our store policy not to....", and not blow smoke up someone's arse in what appears to be either complete lack of knowledge or act of total deceit. If in fact the store owner confirms the stance, then you should go elsewhere. If not, the employee should be taken to task as it shows he is a buffoon....

 

[Compressor]

Yes, but then the store personnel should so state "it is our store policy not to....", and not blow smoke up someone's arse in what appears to be either complete lack of knowledge or act of total deceit. If in fact the store owner confirms the stance, then you should go elsewhere. If not, the employee should be taken to task as it shows he is a buffoon....

I've been diving for a while (since 1984) and have learned to take many of the things LDS tell me with a grain of salt. Many are ignorant and when "gently" challenged will either back off OR remarkably prove themselves more of an idiot rather than a savant. Knowledge is power my friends.

 

[gypsyjim]

Too often I have seen staff member of a business, who have little real first hand knowledge of a subject operate on the "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bull $#it". Rather than admit they do not know something, and possibly look bad in the customer's or employer's eye, just make $#it up as they go along. Dive ops are no different, especially as they do not tend to pay well enough to attract and hold onto high quality employees.