PSI-PCI VCI (VIP) standards?

[rddvet]

SSI also has a vip course ( supposedly not as good as the PSI one, though I fully believe it depends on who teaches it). Neither course wants their info released readily in order to avoid untrained vippers. I personally took the course because I bought my own fill station and didn't want to pay anybody to do the work for me. Though at times when you've got to pull a bunch of doubles apart and tumble away rust, it's almost worth paying.
I personally only vip my tanks every 2-3 years (and I boost oxygen into them). I know the quality of gas that goes in them, and after years of annual vips and never finding an issue except for post-hydro at the first year, I made a calculated choice. I believe that's what michael was alluding to.

 

[Danseur]

I've taken 3 different VIP courses. PSI is the gold standard and what I use when stickering cylinders. I VIP them the same way regardless.

The PSI course also got more in depth in aspects of metallurgy and statistical analysis.

Even if you don't want yo do your own VIPs, it's a great course to take to build your understanding.

But in a nutshell, is it clean, structurally sound, in hydro, not a condemned/condemnable or obsolete cylinder, and where there are imperfections/damage etc, is it really minor (xyz measurements), or will it effect the integrity of this high pressure vessel?

More than a few times jokers have tapped and run a bolt into a drilled (condemned) cylinder, grinded it off, painted it, then tried to get fills. Or powder coated where the heat anneals the metal and it's now brittle etc.

So I'm not sure or your rational, but is there a beef?

 

[guruboy]

So PSI-PCI are setting a standard for the dive industry (at least the US dive industry) by which shops inspect ones cylinders and can recommend them as not being serviceable and the organization does not have any codified list of standards to publish for the public to reference against in order to assess what an inspector tells them? That doesn't make much sense to me.

Since the DOT does not require visual inspection and it is just an industry accepted best practice, and if PSI-PCI is "the" go-to organization and only one trusted by the USDOT then they are sort of writing the regulations on what is acceptable or not...that information should be publicly available.

I have no desire to self-teach how the inspection should be carried out, how to probe pitting deep inside the tank, or what have you, but specifications such as how deep any pitting can be before the tank fails the inspection should be knowable to not just those performing the inspections but those who are subject to it as well.

The specs for a hydro test are able to be referenced...why not the specs for a VIP?

-Z

PSI sets a “standard”. Their standard is generally accepted as a “good” standard for scuba.

any shop can set a standard. Any shop can also refuse to accept any other standard.

none of it is regulated, except for the DOT one.

the funny thing about a VIP is that it guarantees nothing once the tank leaves the possession of the inspector. It would be like a doctor trying to certify you are in good health for the entire year after your annual checkup.

 

[Zef]

So I'm not sure or your rational, but is there a beef?

Beef?, no beef. Rational was that I was looking at another site and there was a discussion post stating that a re-painted tank was considered unacceptable under PSI-PCI standards. It prompted me to look up the standards they go by and when visiting their website I could not find anything related to standards, not even links to the DOT/CFR regulations that guide them. It just seems odd to me that standards based on regulations would be considered so secretive or exclusive.

-Z

 

[guruboy]

Beef?, no beef. Rational was that I was looking at another site and there was a discussion post stating that a re-painted tank was considered unacceptable under PSI-PCI standards. It prompted me to look up the standards they go by and when visiting their website I could not find anything related to standards, not even links to the DOT/CFR regulations that guide them. It just seems odd to me that standards based on regulations would be considered so secretive or exclusive.

-Z

you could try buying their book.

Inspecting Cylinders [107-003] - $20.00 : PSI Cylinders, Professional Scuba Inspectors

 

[Zef]

I want to state that I think this discussion has kind of derailed. If one goes back to my original post I was simply asking for a list of standards for visual inspections. I referenced that I had checked on the PSI-PCI website and did not find it. There was some confusion on my part as to who PSI-PCI is and what there purpose is.

While I have strong feelings on the commodification of information, especially publicly available information, this discussion thread is not about that.

The discussion became derailed when it was suggested that one should not have access to the standards that PSI-PCI train to.

My initial query was satisfied with the links and info shared in posts #7 and #10.

There was never an intent to attack or even question the business model of PSI-PCI.

I appreciate the info provided as well as the candid discussion, but wanted to refocus this thread on discovery/learning the regulatory/industry standards for visual inspections of compressed air cylinders used in diving.

-Z