Overfilling Scuba Cylinders

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!

PASTED FROM ANOTHER THREAD!!!!!!!

Original poster- SOHNJE

This is what happened after several recent threads got a group of us questioning, what really does happen when.....

So we headed to our favorite quarry with a bunch of disposable equipment, a group of over eager adults acting like adolescents, (the firemen in this group still scare me), and the skill an know-how of how to "safetly" destroy things.


These were our findings:

1.) You definately can get cell service to about 27ft and it no matter what service you had, once you hit 30ft, none of us got service. Can you hear me now??

2.) Yes, you can text easily under water above 27ft.

3.) Blackberries implode at 75ft whether inside the drysuit or outside in a ziplock. (we figured when wearing a drysuit, we are all human ziplocks.

4.) Everything we placed in a water tight "scuba" container (75.00) had no problems. oh, everything we placed in a rigid tupperware contained had no problems either.
(3.99). We were only able to go 100ft before we hit bottom.

5.) For the ladies divers in the crowd, you can apply lipstick easily underwater at any depth. But the eyeshadow application left much to be desired.

6.) Traditional batteries do not explode or rupture at depth, but do explode upon rapid ascent. We know they expode going from 100ft to the surface attached to a lift bag.
There was no effect on NiCa batteries. (wondering about divelights and cameras on this one) We had reports of some ruptures of batteries during dives, but were still inconclusive on what really happens.

7.) Luxfer 3000psi 80al cylinders do explode if over filled. Ours blew at 5200lbs at a depth of 20ft. (thats all the hp hose we had). It was loud, made a huge water spout, so we did one more just for fun. At 15 ft, (we lost some hose on the first trial), the tank exploded at 5500. ( thanks to the search and recovery crew, we recovered all parts and pieces at depth)

8.) HP Steel tanks are impossible to explode!!! They did not supply any fun, and we were all disappointed. We couldn't crank the pressure high enough. The hoses were rated to 8000lbs and blew. So we know a 120 steel can sustain at least 8000lbs. (BTW, no one was in water or in any position to be harmed. We had professionals guiding us. Two were bomb disposal people, thus meaning that a steel tank filled to 4500psi plus a little bit explosive makes an awesome sound and splash!!!)

note: When the AL's exploded, they all remained in one piece. When the steel blew, it fractured into three pieces. We're not sure if the explosive charge caused this or is this what happens when steel bursts??


9.) Accidently, we believe K valves are impossible to destroy. Although the tanks bit the dust, would you believe the valves were fine and still usuable. We chalked this up to luck and our lack of scientific rigor.

10.) Scuba masks shatter when in the water when tanks explode, We hung one off a line about 20 yards away. The mask cracked nicely. So try not to swim next to your buddy if their tank is going to explode. It might interfere with your dive.
 
Just to make myself clear.

1 I know nothing about metalurgy
2 I am an engineer but my specialty is not in gas cylinders but in hydraulic systems
3 Everyone is free to fill their tanks to what ever they want
4 I am inclined to follow engineering guidelines when pressures of 3000 psi plus are concerned. I have seen things blow up with that much pressure and it is not a pleasure to watch. It is extremely dangerous. It wouldn't matter if it was a gas or a fluid it is still dangerous.
5 Now that I know this is something that occurs on a regular basis I will buy new tanks not used
6 I am a vacation diver, I use information that I find here and in other places that is useful, I like it as a forum for discussion.
7 I offered my opinion as my opinion. I will follow what I belive to be true just as others will do what they want. It doesn't matter to me. I will never be involved in cave diving so being around equipment that is pushed beyond it engineered limits won't be a concern for me.

Again this is just my opinion.

I thought this was a place to discuss and bring experiences that some may find helpful or informative. I didn't know it would turn into a place where personal attacks are the norm rather than the exception. Thanks to all who discussed it with a reasonable tone and an open mind.
 
I will never be involved in cave diving so being around equipment that is pushed beyond it engineered limits won't be a concern for me.


That's exactly the point though, is what I'm trying to make. Filling a lp rated cylinder to 3600psi is not pushing past it's engineered limit. You're shortening it's lifespan, yes, but even that lifespan is longer than you're ever going to use it for. For instance, Faber published data a few years ago stating their cylinders were good for 10,000 cycles at 4250psi. Filling to 3600psi does not make a 3AA steel diving cylinder instantly unsafe.
 
Not sure I buy that. They hydrostatically test tanks to 5/3rds rated pressure. Some tanks do a lot of hydros (and by definition are thereby very old tanks), and I have not yet once seen a warning "don't hydrostatically test your tanks too often as it will weaken them."

There are 2 unique things abut the hydro event that need to be included in this thought.

1. It's done in a water/water situation which cancels the risk of an explosive failure.

2. It includes measurement of the elastic behavior of the cylinder. The end result of the high pressure exposure is the condition of the cylinder. That is, it is proven to be in safe condition after exposure.

Repeated major overfills do not include the safeguard and feedback of these two points.

Pete
 
has a tank EVER exploded because of a cave fill? they've been doing it for years and years. has it EVER happened?

If you discount cylinder explosions due to 6351 alloys and one other explosion due to a manufacturing defect, the answer is "yes." I know of at least one cylinder that exploded at 2,900 PSI during a fill (details on the United States DOT website).

Fascinating! And were did you take your class in metallurgy?

All material stretches. There is an elastic limit, known in engineering as ‘yield strength’, which is the limit of stretch beyond which the material will no longer return to its original shape and size (see stress-strain curve). General design criteria uses six tenths of the yield strength (.6 * yield) as the maximum allowable working stress. Pressure cylinders and other items that could constitute a hazard to humans have more stringent requirements.

The working pressure of the steel scuba cylinders currently being manufactured are not close to the pressure at which they will permanently deform. That is, however, part of the hydro inspection, to record volume displaced by stretch and to see if it returns to original size (if I understand correctly what I've been told about hydros).

That's exactly what I said, in not so many words.
 
If you discount cylinder explosions due to 6351 alloys and one other explosion due to a manufacturing defect, the answer is "yes." I know of at least one cylinder that exploded at 2,900 PSI during a fill (details on the United States DOT website).

A low pressure steel tank being cave filled?
 
A low pressure steel tank being cave filled?

You know, I can't remember enough of the details to give you an answer. All the data is on the DOT website, if you care to search for it.

I will offer an insight of mine, that is strictly an opinion after reading through a lot of scuba-related research and tech reports.

Over the past 30 years there have been many changes to the way we treat the sport and our cylinders. Most of these changes were brought about because of lessons learned from problems, accidents and fatalities.

For instance, over 30 years ago the U.S. Navy discovered a lot of corrosion in their aluminum cylinders and hired the Battelle Memorial Institute to do some research into that, and many other, issues relating to cylinders. One of the many recommendations that resulted from this research was that of frequent cylinder inspections. We all do annual VIPs today because of over 1,600 corroded, weakened cylinders found during that study.

There have been numerous deaths relating to cylinder handling, cylinder material flaws and cylinder corrosion. All of these incidents shaped the way we currently inspect and handle cylinders today. Other agencies, such as the Compressed Gas Association (GCA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) have all stepped into to add their recommendations (based on the best evidence available) and regulations.

As a result of these changes, nowadays we hear very little of problems, injury or death relating to the handling of scuba cylinders. 30 years ago that wasn't the case. That's because we're getting smarter about the way we handle cylinders based on cumulative experience and best evidence. Are we getting complacent as the result of the industry's safety successes?

Now, we are still arguing about over-pressurizing scuba cylinders beyond their rated pressure. (And I'm not talking about overfilling + cylinders.) There is plenty of evidence to support the fact that over-pressurizing cylinders can lead to failures, especially in the setting of corrosion. And while a cylinder "failure" in a hydro tank is no big deal, a cylinder "failure" at a fill station results in a massive, deadly explosion. People have had their limbs ripped off or even been killed in these explosions.

We have no evidence whatsoever telling us how many times we can over-pressure a cylinder before the cylinder will fail. Anecdotal evidence is not good evidence. Just because Billy-Bob in High Springs has filled his AL80 to 4,000 PSI every day for the past 10 years doesn't mean that it's safe to over-pressurize an AL80. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. We just don't have anything besides anecdotal evidence on which to base an opinion. Perhaps people who regularly over-pressurize their cylinders need a hydro annually, but there's no evidence to support that either.

So why over-pressurize a cylinder? There's plenty of evidence dating back 30 years to support the fact that it's a dangerous practice. But there's no real evidence to support the safety of over-pressurization. What real evidence is out there that supports a safe protocol for repeatedly over-pressurizing scuba cylinders? There isn't any real evidence, unless you want to believe Billy-Bob's preaching. Remember, though, that anecdotal evidence is the least reliable and least accurate form of evidence.

We're getting smarter and safer, except when it comes to over-pressurization. Is it going to take another maiming or fatality to prove that over-filling is not worth the risk?You can always chose a less aggressive dive plan so that you don't need to over-pressurize. But you can't always successfully re-attached a mangled eye or leg that was blown off by an exploding cylinder.

If I offered you an extra 500 PSI in your cylinder, would you let me cut out your eye as payment? Is the extra gas worth that much to you?

Anyway, that's just an opinion. I hope we continue to move forward with scuba safety, not backwards. Complacency is our enemy.
 
That's exactly what I said, in not so many words.

That's not even close to what you said. Here is what you said:

If you over-pressurize a cylinder, you are exceeding the fully elastic capacity of the material.

In other words that filling them to 160% was taking them beyond their elastic limit.

It is not!

Working pressure and elastic limit are two seperate values!
 
Not sure I buy that. They hydrostatically test tanks to 5/3rds rated pressure. Some tanks do a lot of hydros (and by definition are thereby very old tanks), and I have not yet once seen a warning "don't hydrostatically test your tanks too often as it will weaken them."

Fruits and veggies again!

We use water for testing because gas is compressible, water is not. If a tank fails during hydro it squirts a little water out into the containment vessel.

If a tank fails from over-pressurization of gas the gas continues expanding propelling any metal that seperates from the cylinder onward and outward to boldy go where no one has gone before.

If that happens, try not to be directly in the 'line of fire'.
 

Back
Top Bottom