85, not 95
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
My mistake - kind of - Faber makes both.85, not 95
Was out of town, and just took a call. One of the lp85 tanks of my Worthington/XS twins failed hydro on it's first requalification. Tester said he did it twice, both times, far from passing.
Amazing. This tank has less than 2 dozen fills, and never saw 2800 psi! Always part of this set of twins.
So aggravated!
I suspect it's possibly a real fail, but we used to see this all the time in Florida with PSTs and Worthingtons...
I checked that as soon as I first read this post.
I am pretty sure the LP85s are DOT 3AA and not the SP14157 X-series cylinders (3442 PSI) that require the special protocol.
Could you clarify this? I have a Faber HP100 that's hot dip galvanized. Does that make it more likely to fail hydro if someone doesn't do a different sort of testing process?The prestretch helps cut down false failures for all hot dip galvanized tanks. Even the old PST lp72s benefit from it. The SP tanks go by ree for pass/fail is the difference compared to the 3aa for Worthington.