little help...tank fails and destroyed

[nilsdiver]

Condemning a cylinder generally involves defacing the DOT # or Serial #, not screwing up the threads. The shop that did the inspection owes you a new tank.

See: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/octqtr/pdf/49cfr180.207.pdf

Terry

Well see section 2(iii) of your pdf. But that does require the direction of the owner before screwing up the threads.

 

[paradicio]

Let us know how this turns out, I'm curious now what the shop will do for you.

 

[Ann Marie]

I wouldn't necessarily say that you were hosed.

First of all, look at and read any paperwork you signed. Did you sign a release for the cylinder inspection. You might have given them approval to destroy your cylinder if condemned.

Luxfer has 2 ways of handling a condemned cylinder in the US. If the cylinder is condemned during an inspection and is to be returned to Luxfer they recommend to strike out the stamped markings on the cylinder crown, leaving the serial number and the hydro test dates visible. If the cylinder is not to be returned then they recommend that the cylinder is made unusable by destroying the threads.

If an inspector found a reason to condemn the cylinder, they should have had a second or third inspector confirm the condition of the cylinder.

How old was the cylinder that was condemned? Luxfer says that cylinders made from their 6061 alloy are not susceptible to sustained-load cracks but their earlier cylinders were are are required to have an eddy current test. I would imagine that if a newer Luxfer 6061 cylinder had sustained-load cracks Luxfer would want to see it.

PSI (Professional Scuba Inspectors is recognized as the Industry Standard for inspecting cylinders)recommends the following for condemning a cylinder:
-OBTAIN Signed Customer Authority (required)
-Get 2nd Opinion
-Notify Customer
-Stamp “CONDEMNED” OR
-XX out Markings (except Hydro and Serial #) AND
-Destroy Valve Threads

Hope this help.

For those that may ask how I know this.... I'm a PSI Instructor

 

[Ann Marie]

Eddy current testing is not valid on new tanks, so they should not even be doing it on a new 6061 alloy tank.

Not quite correct. Luxfer has authorized the use of the Visual Plus 3 and the Visual Eddy Mark 5 on their proprietary 6061 alloy. Some of the older eddy machines can result in misleading "false-positive" readings.

I probably wouldn't get one, but I would let everyone on this board and all other boards know what facility this is. If I lived in your area, I would want to know. They should lose all of their business.

Let's not condemn THEM prematurely (yep, pun intended).

 

[NOVIZWHIZ]

This was not a dive shop, this is a company who hydro's tanks - mostly for fire department bottles. The guys at the local FD also have a dive team and sent their jugs, too. I work with them as a volunteer diver and they asked if anyone had tanks for hydro as the guy was driving down and wanted to get as many as he could. (I'm in SC and the company is in another state). I tossed mine in.

I appreciate the responses, but where can I find the entire DOT document referencing this? like can I say see paragraph ----, page---of the ---DOT manual? I'll check into this and let the board and everybody else know the results....tahnx again!

 

[Henryville]

Eddy current testing is not valid on new tanks, so they should not even be doing it on a new 6061 alloy tank. They screwed you because they have no clue what they are doing. I would be asking them for a new tank. I probably wouldn't get one, but I would let everyone on this board and all other boards know what facility this is. If I lived in your area, I would want to know. They should lose all of their business.

This is the big issue, is it not? Eddy current testing shouldn't be done on these tanks, false positives are too common and there is no indication the problem the technique is designed to detect even exists for this alloy. It will inevitably lead to condemnation of tanks that have no flaw.

Good luck convincing an LDS that they shouldn't be amortizing their investment in the eddy current test rig, though. I wonder what sort of testing volume they see in the 6351 tanks.

 

[Web Monkey]

This was not a dive shop, this is a company who hydro's tanks - mostly for fire department bottles. The guys at the local FD also have a dive team and sent their jugs, too. I work with them as a volunteer diver and they asked if anyone had tanks for hydro as the guy was driving down and wanted to get as many as he could. (I'm in SC and the company is in another state). I tossed mine in.

I appreciate the responses, but where can I find the entire DOT document referencing this? like can I say see paragraph ----, page---of the ---DOT manual? I'll check into this and let the board and everybody else know the results....tahnx again!

The Code of Federal Regulations

 

[akscubainst]

Eddy current testing is not valid on new tanks, so they should not even be doing it on a new 6061 alloy tank.

This is only true with the old EC machines. The new one's are valid and EC is recommended on all AL tanks now.

However, in this case, I would have taken the tank to another EC machine before condemning it. We work with our Hydro guy this way, if we find one, we have him EC it to back us up and vis versa.

DM

 

[PhilEllis]

This is the big issue, is it not? Eddy current testing shouldn't be done on these tanks, false positives are too common and there is no indication the problem the technique is designed to detect even exists for this alloy. It will inevitably lead to condemnation of tanks that have no flaw.

Good luck convincing an LDS that they shouldn't be amortizing their investment in the eddy current test rig, though. I wonder what sort of testing volume they see in the 6351 tanks.

I am going to guess that they hydro facility is using the Visual Plus 3 machine, which the largest aluminum scuba cylinder manufacturer, Luxfer, approves for use on the current alloy. I am almost certain that the hydro facility is allowed to use any "mechanical devices" deemed necessary to properly visually inspect a cylinder (mirrors, light, even machines designed to detect cracks.

Rendering the cylinder unusable by drilling or removing neck threads requires the consent of the owner. I would guess that SOMEWHERE in the contract where this cylinder was inspected, there is a provision where the owner (or the person claiming to be the owner by bringing the cylinder to the inspector) gave permission to "damage the threads" or some other physical action, upon condemnation.

Phil Ellis

 

[Nemrod]

I seriously doubt a relatively new 6061 cylinder had neck cracks. N