2airishuman
Contributor
I'm getting pickier about my air fills and have started having some more detailed discussions with the LDSs about their compressor maintenance practices.
One LDS uses a Rix compressor, and asserted in discussions with me that these compressors don't produce CO, are not capable of producing CO even when they are failing, and do not pose an overheating risk because they are water cooled and thermally protected.
The shop went on to say that because they are in a freestanding building with no other tenants, and have a rooftop air intake for the compressor, that there is no plausible means by which their air could become contaminated with CO. They test quarterly using a lab but do not have continuous surveillance for CO.
I'm wondering how well everyone thinks this line of reasoning holds up and whether this would still constitute best practices even without continuous testing.
One LDS uses a Rix compressor, and asserted in discussions with me that these compressors don't produce CO, are not capable of producing CO even when they are failing, and do not pose an overheating risk because they are water cooled and thermally protected.
The shop went on to say that because they are in a freestanding building with no other tenants, and have a rooftop air intake for the compressor, that there is no plausible means by which their air could become contaminated with CO. They test quarterly using a lab but do not have continuous surveillance for CO.
I'm wondering how well everyone thinks this line of reasoning holds up and whether this would still constitute best practices even without continuous testing.