Old steels denied fills due to store "policy"

[JackD342]

I said it once before: “It just takes longer to do the annual inspections.”

The expense of the VE device is nothing to sneeze at either.

 

[markmud]

I'm sorry. Is the 5 or 10 pound argument? Is this the first time for this on SB? Some times you can be right but it makes no difference. 10 years ago I helped out at a store who would not fill tanks past 36%. No reason. He had 4 O2 banks but could not be persuaded. Want 50%? Go somewhere else. Just his shtick. Bantering to and fro aint gonna change any LDS from changing no matter how "right" you are. Or not.

Hi Tridacna,

Thanks for your posts re 6351 alloy tanks and VE. I don't blame an LDS that creates a blanket policy for pre-89 Luxfer tanks that bans employees from pressurizing them. It is a PITA to VE and to investigate whether or not they are 6351.

This thread is now 46 pages long. I am too lazy to research the entire thread for your opinion on filling steel tanks.

My PST 80 and 100 tanks are approaching 20 years old. If you would like, I can take pictures of them and post them. 2 of them look shiny-new and the other 3 have no corrosion or signs of abuse inside and out. They have never been to cave country. They all look shiny new on the inside. Never been tumbled.

They have all been re-VISed after being filled offshore on dive boats even though their current VIS stickers were valid.

Would you fill them and what is your opinion on continuing to fill them? They are steel (obviously--they are PST).

With hydro and VIS, would you fill them at 30 years (all things being equal in terms of general condition)?

cheers,
m

 

[tridacna]

Hi Tridacna,

Thanks for your posts re 6351 alloy tanks and VE. I don't blame an LDS that creates a blanket policy for pre-89 Luxfer tanks that bans employees from pressurizing them. It is a PITA to VE and to investigate whether or not they are 6351.

This thread is now 46 pages long. I am too lazy to research the entire thread for your opinion on filling steel tanks.

My PST 80 and 100 tanks are approaching 20 years old. If you would like, I can take pictures of them and post them. 2 of them look shiny-new and the other 3 have no corrosion or signs of abuse inside and out. They have never been to cave country. They all look shiny new on the inside. Never been tumbled.

They have all been re-VISed after being filled offshore on dive boats even though their current VIS stickers were valid.

Would you fill them and what is your opinion on continuing to fill them? They are steel (obviously--they are PST).

With hydro and VIS, would you fill them at 30 years (all things being equal in terms of general condition)?

cheers,
m

We fill all SCUBA tanks that comply with industry standards. Steel, Al or Fiberwrap. Period. Age is no limiting factor for us.

 

[shurite7]

Before every fill? No.
IIRC, DOT says every 5years with hydro is required; Luxfer said every 2.5 years. (They may have changed that.) In actual practice expect it to be done with annual visual inspection. I still fill those tanks, and I have no hesitation requiring annual VE on 6351 alloy. I am the one filling them...

Luxfer still has 2.5 years on its website.

How often should my Luxfer 6351-alloy scuba tank be inspected?

• DOT requires requalification (hydrostatic retesting and visual inspection) of all aluminum scuba tanks every five years, regardless of alloy.
• Both the DOT and the U.S. scuba industry recommend an annual visual inspection for all 6351-alloy scuba tanks. Luxfer supports this recommendation.
• For its 6351-alloy tanks, Luxfer has established a manufacturer's requirement for a visual inspection, including an eddy-current test, at least every 2.5 years.

Last summer I found one with a crack in the neck. As stated above, doing the eddy current test (VE) is a PITA and it does take longer to VIS the tank.

 

[tridacna]

Luxfer still has 2.5 years on its website.

How often should my Luxfer 6351-alloy scuba tank be inspected?

• DOT requires requalification (hydrostatic retesting and visual inspection) of all aluminum scuba tanks every five years, regardless of alloy.
• Both the DOT and the U.S. scuba industry recommend an annual visual inspection for all 6351-alloy scuba tanks. Luxfer supports this recommendation.
• For its 6351-alloy tanks, Luxfer has established a manufacturer's requirement for a visual inspection, including an eddy-current test, at least every 2.5 years.

Last summer I found one with a crack in the neck. As stated above, doing the eddy current test (VE) is a PITA and it does take longer to VIS the tank.

Last year I found a few that had to be condemned. Explaining this to customers is the worst part.

 

[Storker]

Last year I found a few that had to be condemned. Explaining this to customers is the worst part.

Ignorant customers. If condemnation is based in true technical issues, you won't see me arguing the decision. I might question the decision, though, to make sure it was due to a true technical issue and not a rule book.

 

[shurite7]

Last year I found a few that had to be condemned. Explaining this to customers is the worst part.

Agreed, explaining to the owners isn't enjoyable, even when the crack is shown to them. The one I noted above was the hydro static tester's, so it wasn't so bad.

 

[tridacna]

Ignorant customers. If condemnation is based in true technical issues, you won't see me arguing the decision. I might question the decision, though, to make sure it was due to a true technical issue and not a rule book.

Printouts from the scans and a peek inside the neck and most people are turning them into a bell. If a crack is found, I re-clean the threads and run the test at least twice more.

 

[Bob DBF]

Last year I found a few that had to be condemned. Explaining this to customers is the worst part.

It amazes me they don’t see it coming. I wasn’t annoyed or surprised, I bought them new, so I got a lot of use out of them.


Bob

 

[mictrik]

Yes and no. Certainly if you had a uniform loss of wall thickness you'd be right but the hydro in its current form is a rather crude method.

Now if you used laser shearography and did the same (although applying a partial vacuum would be better) then you'd have a much better test. Materials used to be my speciality, but since I haven't actively practice in over 10 years, I would need to revise the details. Bear in mind I used to write NDT procedures for the UK and US military and commercial aerospace and thi ws my area of expertise.

And I take you point about UT thickness gauges being cheap. But again here they're better for averaging larger areas. and while they're easy to use, sometime interpreting the meaning of the results requires more than a "users" knowledge

There are lots of different ways I could propose that would adequately certify a tank - but they're not cost effective. 18 months ago I assisted in developing a method of examining carbon wrapped tanks - trouble was the cost of the inspection was greater than a new cylinder

Anyway by original opinion is still the same at some point you need to accept items no longer have a usable life.

If it's about losing customers you can't please all of the people all of the time

Force -E has been around a while. Curious how old their storage cylinders are.? Do they disassemble their banks for hydro? How about O2 cylinders for special blending? I have seen cylinders in use from the early 1900's, I think it was 1902. I am pretty sure we once had an 02 cylinder we rented that was even older.