I think I have been "had" just a bit

Please register or login

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

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Ah the classic sustained load cracking thread. Visual eddy may not find a cracked bottle if it hasn't reach the base thread. Only a visual inspection can determine this. I agree the shop should have stickered his bottle if they charged him for the inspection and filled it. Others have already said it; buy bottles made with 6061 or be prepared to have fills denied. It happens frequently at least in Florida and no one is going to lose any sleep over the loss of your $5 air fill or any repeat business because apparently you can't scrape together enough cheddar to buy equipment made in this decade. :D

Just sayin..
 
So, even if the second shop wanted to PERSONALLY make sure there were no cracks in the neck to protect themselves and their employees, they still have to be either idiots or charlatans?
Yes. To follow the logic to a conclusion - what is the point of a Visual Inspection Program, if EVERY shop requires that a VIP be done on every AL tank before every fill, because they 'don't trust' the previous inspection (aka, they only trust their own). Moreover, the (very) recent hydro is a more revealing piece of information than the visual inspection.
So, if anyone who refuses to fill these tanks ... are idiots or charlatans......
That is NOT what I said. Please read what I said and don't misquote. The first shop refused, and they were straightforward about it. They were neither idiots or charlatans, and I would give them a second chance to earn my business. They didn't attempt to charge for anything extra, they merely declined to fill the tank. A very reasonable approach.
what makes these tanks a bad buy unless they are free?
Actually, you are quite correct. Why pay ANYTHING for tanks that are the basis for such inconvenience, when newer AL80 tanks are available at very reasonable prices. Avoid the problems and don't buy them in the first place. In fact, I will take it a step further, to address your question. Even if tanks are free they are a bad buy.
 
Why are you assuming the tank is a 6351 alloy tank... or do you think older 6061 alloy is junk too?

I also wouldn't be so quick to give shop one any technical business as they don't seem to be able to tell the difference between the two alloys. I guess the OP would have to tell us whether they rejected the tanks out of hand or if they detected a type of alloy and made a decision based on that (in which case I would take back my comment about them). Does throwing out older servicable 6061 alloy tanks also seems reasonable? If it does I would suggest that tank selection has moved from a science based realm to a faith based realm.
 
I regularly dive two Lux's from 84 that are 6351, they passed hydro, eddy and VIP and I have had absolutely no problem filling them. I guess I will throw them away.
 
Why are you assuming the tank is a 6351 alloy tank... or do you think older 6061 alloy is junk too?

I also wouldn't be so quick to give shop one any technical business as they don't seem to be able to tell the difference between the two alloys. I guess the OP would have to tell us whether they rejected the tanks out of hand or if they detected a type of alloy and made a decision based on that (in which case I would take back my comment about them). Does throwing out older servicable 6061 alloy tanks also seems reasonable? If it does I would suggest that tank selection has moved from a science based realm to a faith based realm.

We can only assume. The OP didn't offer the manufacturer. We can however deduce the shop is aware of 6351 alloys and their potential for SLC in W/K and Luxfer bottles. Older Catalina bottles do not demonstrate the problem and neither does the 6061 alloy.

What technical business do you suppose he's going to drum up with his penitent for vintage gear?
 
I regularly dive two Lux's from 84 that are 6351, they passed hydro, eddy and VIP and I have had absolutely no problem filling them. I guess I will throw them away.

Oh the drama of it all.

SLC is very rare. However there is potential to kill the fill operator if one of those very rare bottles slips by a shop monkey slapping stickers on bottles and not actually taking the time to LOOK for the signs.

Why should the end user care about the fill operator though.. What a waste of time..
 
The following are Luxfer's responses to frequently asked questions about sustained-load cracking (SLC) in aluminum scuba cylinders made of 6351 alloy.

1. What is sustained-load cracking?

* SLC is a metallurgical phenomenon that occasionally develops in cylinders made of 6351 aluminum alloy, as well as in other types of pressure vessels and structural components under stress for sustained periods of time.
* SLC has occurred in cylinders manufactured by various companies, including Luxfer.
* Cylinders that have been mechanically damaged, over-filled or abused are more susceptible to SLC.
* SLC is not a manufacturing defect; it is a phenomenon inherent in the metal itself.



2. How quickly do the cracks grow?

* Very slowly, as extensive research by Luxfer and outside laboratories has shown.
* No scientific evidence supports rumors and claims of "fast crack growth."
* Cracks typically take eight or more years to grow large enough to cause a cylinder leak.
* Because SLC growth is so slow, properly trained inspectors have adequate opportunity to detect cracks during the normal requalification process.



3. How many aluminum cylinders have exhibited SLC?

* Out of a total population of approximately 1,073,000 Luxfer scuba cylinders made of 6351 alloy, only 1.25% have exhibited SLC.1
* Out of Luxfer's total 6.1-million population of 6351-alloy cylinders, the SLC rate is slightly less than 0.37%.
* While we do not have complete statistics on cylinders manufactured by other companies, industry experts estimate that out of a worldwide population of more than 30 million 6351-alloy cylinders, far less than 1% have exhibited SLC.



4. Which types of cylinders are most susceptible to SLC-related ruptures?

* Any type of cylinder manufactured from 6351 alloy could conceivably develop a sustained-load crack over time if subjected to certain conditions.
* However, a cylinder is more likely to rupture in applications where pressure is higher and where overfilling and abuse occur more often.
* Historically, the applications most susceptible to SLC-related rupture are scuba and SCBA (life support).



5. Are SLC-related scuba tank ruptures widespread?

* No. Of the more than 40-million all-aluminum cylinders manufactured by various companies over the last 45 years, only 20 SLC-related or suspected-SLC ruptures have been reported to regulatory authorities around the world. All these ruptures were in cylinders made from 6351 alloy.
* Of these ruptures, 11 have been scuba cylinders. Six occurred in the United States, and the remainder occurred elsewhere in the world.
* Let's look at the actual record.

Aluminum scuba tank ruptures
DATE LOCATION LISTED CAUSE INJURY? MANUFACTURER
Oct-88 Southport, Australia SLC No Luxfer
Jun-94 Miami, Florida SLC Yes Luxfer
Jan-98 Corlette, Australia SLC No CIG Gas Cylinders*
Feb-98 Riviera Beach, Florida SLC Yes Walter Kidde
Aug-98 Tairua, New Zealand SLC Yes Luxfer
Dec-98 Tampa, Flordia Not determined No Luxfer
Apr-99 British Colombia SLC No Luxfer
Mar-00 Key Largo, Florida SLC Yes Walter Kidde
Jun-00 Miyako Island, Japan SLC No CIG Gas Cylinders
Jul-04 Oahu, Hawaii Not determined Yes Walter Kidde
Sep-04 Videlia, California Not determined No Walter Kidde
Jan-05 Perth, Australia SLC No CIG Gas Cylinders
Jun-07 Rhode Island SLC No Luxfer

*Luxfer Gas Cylinders acquired CIG Gas Cylinders, an Australian manufacturer, in 1997. CIG Gas Cylinders had stopped using 6351 aluminum alloy in 1990, and Luxfer did not use 6351 alloy for cylinders that Luxfer subsequently manufactured in Australia under the name Luxfer Australia. Only Luxfer’s proprietary 6061 aluminum alloy—which is not susceptible to sustained-load cracking—was used for Luxfer Australia cylinders.



6. If there have been so few SLC-related cylinder ruptures, why is there so much alarming information about them on the Internet?

* A great deal of misinformation and exaggeration about SLC is attributable to rumors and inaccurate reports spread by word-of-mouth and the trade press, but especially by the Internet, where the proliferation of inaccuracies is widespread and essentially unregulated.



7. Why is it necessary to have my 6351-alloy cylinder inspected with an eddy-current device?

* When properly used, eddy-current devices contribute significantly to early detection of hard-to-see sustained-load cracks.
* However, an eddy-current test is not a replacement for a diligent visual inspection by a properly trained inspector.
* Eddy-current devices are tools to enhance proper visual inspections.

* Eddy-current devices currently approved by Luxfer for use with Luxfer 6351-alloy cylinders are Visual Plus, Visual Plus II, Visual Plus III, and Visual Eddy. (However, the only eddy-current device approved by Luxfer for use with cylinders made from Luxfer’s proprietary 6061 alloy is Visual Plus III; see question 10, below, for details.)



8. How do I know if the person inspecting my cylinders is properly trained?

* Luxfer recommends taking your cylinder to an authorized Luxfer service center or to an inspector trained by Professional Scuba Inspectors, Inc. (PSI) or the Association of Scuba Service Engineers & Technicians (ASSET).2
* It cannot be overemphasized that the quality of inspection is far more important than the frequency of inspection! An untrained or improperly trained inspector can look at a 6351-alloy cylinder numerous times without detecting SLC.
* Unfortunately, many untrained or improperly trained technicians continue to inspect cylinders, and no uniform standards for inspector training and certification exist among regulatory authorities around the world.
* Luxfer is working with industry groups and government agencies to help establish such standards.



9. How can I tell if my Luxfer cylinder is made from 6351 alloy?

* The easiest way is to check the original hydrostatic test date stamped on the cylinder crown.
* Luxfer manufactured 6351-alloy cylinders during the following periods:
* United States: 1972 through mid-1988
* England: 1958 through 1995
* After the above dates, Luxfer began making cylinders from a proprietary 6061 alloy, which is not susceptible to SLC.
* In Australia, CIG Gas Cylinders manufactured scuba tanks from 6351 alloy from 1975 through 1990, and then switched to 6061 alloy. Luxfer acquired CIG Gas Cylinders in 1997, by which time Luxfer was manufacturing all scuba tanks with its own proprietary version of 6061 alloy. All Luxfer tanks manufactured in Australia under the names “Luxfer” and “Luxfer Australia ” have been made exclusively with Luxfer’s 6061 alloy.




10. If Luxfer 6061-alloy cylinders are not susceptible to SLC, why has Luxfer exchanged 6061 cylinders that have been reported to have cracks?

* After the introduction of eddy-current technology, Luxfer received reports of cracking in 6061-alloy cylinders. We accepted returns on about 1,200 of these cylinders to conduct extensive tests. Not a single cylinder was found to be cracked.
* On Luxfer 6061-alloy cylinders, eddy-current devices sometimes show harmless "indications" that lead to "false-positive" readings for SLC.



11. 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.


FOOTNOTES:

1Statistics are current as of April 15, 2005; statistics are subject to change.

2Telephone PSI at 425-398-4300; e-mail: psi@psicylinders.com.
Telephone ASSET in England at 01524 381831; e-mail: admin@scubatechnician.com.
 
I regularly dive two Lux's from 84 that are 6351, they passed hydro, eddy and VIP and I have had absolutely no problem filling them. I guess I will throw them away.

Your gonna DIE, and I'm not going to dive with you armed with this new information.
 
Your gonna DIE, and I'm not going to dive with you armed with this new information.


More likely the fill operator than the end user.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom