Worthington/xs scuba lp85 failed first hydro?

[Luis H]

incorrect statements

Um.... That "guy named Luis" is a licensed professional engineer and provided his professional engineering knowledge as to certification of the value. How do you think the manufacturer did it? He takes the liability in establishing it. It should be a document establishing the value, and certified by his professional seal. No, not word of mouth...

Well, you are correct, but @Tracy has a bit of a point. Most hydro stations have a hard time interpreting the codes so they will most likely "play it safe"... even if they don't have a clue of what "play it safe" really means.

Our legal system is so messed-up when it comes to liability, that everyone makes up their own interpretations.

I did follow all the codes when calculating all my REE numbers and actually had personal conversations with the local (more like regional) code enforcement officer. I offer to supply stamped (with my PE seal) calculations for the records, but she said that was not necessary and way above the requirements. Just readable calculations in the records was good enough.

But again, the level of miss-information and ignorance in the industry is so high that sometimes facts take a back seat... This reminds me of something else...

 

[Luis H]

Cool. Get a hydro station, get an RIN, and you can plus stamp all the steel 72s you want.
I answered your question about has anybody tried it. Probably not. There is zero to gain and everything to lose.
The facility I work with does thousands and thousands of cylinders per year. And probably 50 vintage scuba tanks. It isn't worth the time or hassle. If you stamped the REE into the cylinder crown, it would be inputted and would come back with a plus. If it isn't stamped or a known value that has documentation, it doesn't. For example, a Taylor Wharton 200 cf oxygen cylinder from the 80s doesn't have the REE stamped in the neck, it still gets a plus. Documentation is on site and they know it from memory as the see 100 of them per month. The big part is documentation is available on site.

I was typing when you posted.

I basically agree with most of what you are saying, with the exception of the statement "everything to lose". That is just really a perception, but to the hydro facility is very important even if it incorrect.

I have worked in (or with) several hydro facilities over the years in 3 different states and Puerto Rico.

But I know all this doesn't matter to the typical hydro facility that "wants to play it safe". Making errors even on their paper work is costly, so I understand it, that they don't want to get out of their comfort zone.

The owner of the one local hydro facility that was following all my calculations decided to close the dive shop and move to Florida, so I am looking for another hydro facility. At this point my issue is not the plus stamp, but that they do the pre-test procedure... and they are charging a bit more than I am used to.


In any case, the "everything to lose" is IMHO a little bit too dramatic, but I agree that it is what some perceive as being correct.

 

[Tracy]

I was typing when you posted.

I basically agree with most of what you are saying, with the exception of the statement "everything to lose". That is just really a perception, but to the hydro facility is very important even if it incorrect.

I have worked in (or with) several hydro facilities over the years in 3 different states and Puerto Rico.

But I know all this doesn't matter to the typical hydro facility that "wants to play it safe". Making errors even on their paper work is costly, so I understand it, that they don't want to get out of their comfort zone.

The owner of the one local hydro facility that was following all my calculations decided to close the dive shop and move to Florida, so I am looking for another hydro facility. At this point my issue is not the plus stamp, but that they do the pre-test procedure... and they are charging a bit more than I am used to.


In any case, the "everything to lose" is IMHO a little bit too dramatic, but I agree that it is what some perceive as being correct.

Honestly, we rarely do the pretest round out unless it fails. It adds a few minutes to the job and rarely comes into play. The only ones that fail are new cylinders and ones with no cycles. Once the cylinder has been filled and drained a bunch of times, the galvanizing isn't hard, brittle, and thick anymore.
If it fails, it gets the whole workup and tested again.

 

[Luis H]

Honestly, we rarely do the pretest round out unless it fails. It adds a few minutes to the job and rarely comes into play. The only ones that fail are new cylinders and ones with no cycles. Once the cylinder has been filled and drained a bunch of times, the galvanizing isn't hard, brittle, and thick anymore.
If it fails, it gets the whole workup and tested again.

I am OK with that as long as you realize what you are doing and not condemning the cylinders.

About 20 years ago, a facility (mostly fire extinguisher type of hydro facility) condemned and XXX out the DOT stamp on 3 steel 72 of mine, because they didn't do the pretest and to add "insult to injury" he wanted to "play it safe" because he knew that I would be wearing the cylinder on my back.

I demanded to see and get a copy of the hydro numbers (my legal rights), and yes, the numbers were high, near the 10% draw line, but they were under. I made it clear that he violated the codes and that he needed to replace my cylinders. He did source 3 steel 72 in good condition. I did not what new cylinders, I insisted on three steel 72s.

If he would have failed one steel 72, I might have not questioned it, but three cylinders... NO f@#ing way.


With the old hydro facility I started with (in 1972) we always did a leak test due to the fitting on the lid of the water tank (pipe thread not a quick disconnect you see now), so we were essentially doing a pre-test, but we didn't call it that.

 

[rhwestfall]

If it fails, it gets the whole workup and tested again.

And that is commendable! I wish the facility here had that interest. Rip through, XXX-out, next tank... sorry, failed...

 

[rhwestfall]

@Tracy - I don't expect a + stamp on an obscure tank, but when the RIN is stamped in the tank, don't give me a BS line of you don't have the info, or the paperwork is too complex (yes, have said both)....

Like I said, wish your facility was here..

 

[Still Kicking]

There is no pretest requirement for 3AA tanks. Pretest only applies to specific exemptions.

 

[runsongas]

while not required for 3AA, it is recommended by both PST and Worthington for all of their hot dip galvanized tanks

once the faber HDG tanks start hitting renewals, I would not be surprised for them to do the same

 

[Luis H]

There is no pretest requirement for 3AA tanks. Pretest only applies to specific exemptions.

That is not correct.

I can include other documentation, but here is one document. I even highlighted the applicability.

This is a manufacturer (PST) requirement for all their galvanized steel cylinders (starting with the ones manufactured in 1952). I think that paragraph is very clear.

 

[rhwestfall]

Yet the hydrotest facility will say it is not applicable to xs/Worthington, only PST, and especially not lp tanks... Heard that too ..