Overfilling LP Steel Tanks -- How bad is it?

[WD8CDH]

PARDON THE HIJACK

Actually, Luxfer has JUST re-entered the scuba cylinder market with 4 cylinders. They will only be available in the brushed aluminum finish. Among them will be the brushed aluminum 40CF and the brushed aluminum 80CF. They will be available almost immediately. The old "cheap" Luxfer days are gone, but I think the news of continued availability is welcome.

More information will follow.

Phil Ellis
Discount Scuba Gear at DiveSports.com - Buy Scuba Diving Equipment & Snorkeling Equipment

Did you notice that one of the re-introduced tanks was the 106 CF 4350psi composite tank. Not very many shops that could overfill that tank.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

I think I started something...

Any Professional that gives advice or an answer, that is contrary to his or her certifying agency, the manufacture of the product, local, state or federal law is wrong.

My initial comment was to express my public dissapointment with people who have a "professional" designation with their nickname.

We are bound both ethically, code of conduct by our angencies, the law and by liability which doesn't allow us to just give answers people are looking for if they are contrary to those "Right answers".

We all have answers based on experience and the text book answers. These answers don't always agree, in fact they sometimes flat out conflict. As professionals, as people who can be held liable, we should refrain from giving any answer but the one that is in the text book to limit our liability.

We don't always have the luxury to give opinions, or answer questions sometimes the way we'd like to. I am "duty bound" (Legally, ethically, standards, law, liabilty) as is every other Instructor, Asst. Instructor, to give the so called "RIGHT" answer to certain questions.

I know I overfill my tanks on occassion, but publicly, when asked directly by someone the answer has to be NO as a dive professional.

The chances of a tank exploding, especially a steel one is remote, but there IS a chance. I'm not going to be the Instructor that said "yea, go ahead, it's not a big deal to put an extra 500lbs or more in your tank".

Diving safe, responsibly, and eliminating or mitigating as many risks as possible is our job. Giving someone advice that introduces risk, however small, is in my opinion is contrary to our obligation as an Instructor/Asst. Ins/DM.

So, move on with the topic. Sorry for inadverdantly causing it to be hickjacked....

Actually no. I used to teach ethics and currently work in a regulatory capacity where I apply professional ethics on a daily basis. What you describe - rigid adherance to rules simply to limit your own liability - is a distinctly unprofessional trait and one that is representative of a fairly low level of moral and ethical development.

There are essentially three major stages of development in this regard. (over simplified for the sake of brevity.)

1) You "know" the "right" thing or do the "right" thing because someone in authority told you, you read it in a boook, etc. You adhere to black and white ideals based on a higher authority. No real knowledge, thougth or interpretaion is required, which for those people is very comforting.

2) You know or do something because the RULES say that you have to do a particular thing in a particular manner. You are in effect rule bound and belive in the value of rules and their validity in all situations and again find comfort in that. But if 2 rules, tenents or ideals conflict, you are pretty much SOL and run for cover - at best trying to find one rule to hide under.

3) You understand all the variables and do something because it makes sense to do it in the larger context of the situation. You also know enough to know that universal rights and wrongs just don't exist and the "rightness" or "wrongness" of a particular action is largely situational and cannot be separated from the larger context in which it exists. In this case, the rules are just one factor to consider and situations where one rule may conflict with another are possible to resolved as you understand the bigger ideals and philosphies that underpin the rules. The conflict of 2 or more rules, ideals, or tenents is in fact the basis of any ethical or moral crisis or dilemma.

Regardless of profession, you would expect a "professional" to be at the top of their game and in terms of ethics to be able to operate at the third level and anyone stuck in some sort of rule bound stage of development is not truly a professional. Most "rules" tend to be developed with respect to worst case scenarios that are not representative of the other 95% of the cases encountered.

Sadly, many "professionals" do indeed operate at that 2nd level. For example the whole real estate /banking crisis was not a surprise to those in the industry - they knew it was going to end badly, but they justified it as the rules said it was legal and they adhered to the rules and made tons of money before it all fell apart. The truly ethical and profesional individuals in the industry chose not to play that game as it was the wrong thing to do from a moral and thical perspective. The rules that allowed it were based on a flawed or perhaps outdated philosophy that assumed a certain morality existed in the market that would curb and prevent abuses. Again, those that refrained understood that and did the right thing as they understood the issue well beyond the rules and regulations.

As applied to over filling tanks, if you are a moron who does not understand the basic idea that a tank has to be clean, rust free, properly inspected, then I would not suggest to them that they overfill a tank, as that pracitce is not appropriate for you. Similarly, if there is no real need for the extra gas, then I also would not recomend the overfill as it is not appropriate to the situation. But if a diver is going to penetrate into a cave where the extra gas may prove to be very useful and may allow them to have a larger reserve of gas, then absolutely, an overfill makes sense, especially when that overfill is within the test limits of the tank and when there is a decade or two of experience suggesting that the practice will not reult in your imminent death. In that case a Full Cave Instructor would be regarded as being unprofessional in suggesting that a diver should never fill your LP tank to more than 2400 psi.

You simple CANNOT make broad sweeping "always", "never" absoulte and unyielding statements and then call yourself a "professional". If rigid adherance to rules was all it took then any moron could become a "professional" - just like the large number of DM's and OW instructors who think they are professionals just because they passed some minimal training / course standards. That in and of itself does not cause aperson to have the judgement, experience, insight or knowledge needed to be a "professional" in a given field.

In short, don't talk about ethics or professionalism when you know damn little about either subject.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

What is the wall thickness on a worthington or equal LP tank? I found 0.19 in another thread and the numbers aren't working out.

Thanks!

Required wall thickness in a 3AA steel tank will depend on the diameter of the tank and the lenght of the tank. Both increasing lenght and larger diameter of a tank increase the wall stresses and require thicker walls for a given service pressure.

So a 2400 psi tank that is 20" tall and 7.25" in diameter will need thicker walls than one that is 20" tall and 5.0" in diameter.

Similarly, a 2400 psi tank that is 26" tall and 8" in diamter will have thicker walls than one that is only 20" tall and 8" in diameter.

 

[PhilEllis]

Yes, I noticed that. I have only seen one of those cylinders. I don't think there is much interest in that product.

Phil Ellis
Discount Scuba Gear at DiveSports.com - Buy Scuba Diving Equipment & Snorkeling Equipment

Did you notice that one of the re-introduced tanks was the 106 CF 4350psi composite tank. Not very many shops that could overfill that tank.

 

[Mark Michaud SELAUSAR]

Actually no. I used to teach ethics and currently work in a regulatory capacity where I apply professional ethics on a daily basis. What you describe - rigid adherance to rules simply to limit your own liability - is a distinctly unprofessional trait and one that is representative of a fairly low level of moral and ethical development.

There are essentially three major stages of development in this regard. (over simplified for the sake of brevity.)

1) You "know" the "right" thing or do the "right" thing because someone in authority told you, you read it in a boook, etc. You adhere to black and white ideals based on a higher authority. No real knowledge, thougth or interpretaion is required, which for those people is very comforting.

2) You know or do something because the RULES say that you have to do a particular thing in a particular manner. You are in effect rule bound and belive in the value of rules and their validity in all situations and again find comfort in that. But if 2 rules, tenents or ideals conflict, you are pretty much SOL and run for cover - at best trying to find one rule to hide under.

3) You understand all the variables and do something because it makes sense to do it in the larger context of the situation. You also know enough to know that universal rights and wrongs just don't exist and the "rightness" or "wrongness" of a particular action is largely situational and cannot be separated from the larger context in which it exists. In this case, the rules are just one factor to consider and situations where one rule may conflict with another are possible to resolved as you understand the bigger ideals and philosphies that underpin the rules. The conflict of 2 or more rules, ideals, or tenents is in fact the basis of any ethical or moral crisis or dilemma.

Regardless of profession, you would expect a "professional" to be at the top of their game and in terms of ethics to be able to operate at the third level and anyone stuck in some sort of rule bound stage of development is not truly a professional. Most "rules" tend to be developed with respect to worst case scenarios that are not representative of the other 95% of the cases encountered.

Sadly, many "professionals" do indeed operate at that 2nd level. For example the whole real estate /banking crisis was not a surprise to those in the industry - they knew it was going to end badly, but they justified it as the rules said it was legal and they adhered to the rules and made tons of money before it all fell apart. The truly ethical and profesional individuals in the industry chose not to play that game as it was the wrong thing to do from a moral and thical perspective. The rules that allowed it were based on a flawed or perhaps outdated philosophy that assumed a certain morality existed in the market that would curb and prevent abuses. Again, those that refrained understood that and did the right thing as they understood the issue well beyond the rules and regulations.

As applied to over filling tanks, if you are a moron who does not understand the basic idea that a tank has to be clean, rust free, properly inspected, then I would not suggest to them that they overfill a tank, as that pracitce is not appropriate for you. Similarly, if there is no real need for the extra gas, then I also would not recomend the overfill as it is not appropriate to the situation. But if a diver is going to penetrate into a cave where the extra gas may prove to be very useful and may allow them to have a larger reserve of gas, then absolutely, an overfill makes sense, especially when that overfill is within the test limits of the tank and when there is a decade or two of experience suggesting that the practice will not reult in your imminent death. In that case a Full Cave Instructor would be regarded as being unprofessional in suggesting that a diver should never fill your LP tank to more than 2400 psi.

You simple CANNOT make broad sweeping "always", "never" absoulte and unyielding statements and then call yourself a "professional". If rigid adherance to rules was all it took then any moron could become a "professional" - just like the large number of DM's and OW instructors who think they are professionals just because they passed some minimal training / course standards. That in and of itself does not cause aperson to have the judgement, experience, insight or knowledge needed to be a "professional" in a given field.

In short, don't talk about ethics or professionalism when you know damn little about either subject.

Very nicely put. That pretty much sums things up. Gotta know the whys as well as the whats to make an informed decision and use it as your own. Well done.

 

[SharkDiver36]

In short, don't talk about ethics or professionalism when you know damn little about either subject.

I would say the same. You are entitled to your opinion as I am mine.

It is wrong to tell someone to break a rule - period. The rules are in place for safety.

The operating pressure is physically stamped on the tank. That is the limit of the pressure for general use.

Breaking the rules, breaking standards, breaking the law is unethical.

Ethics is a guideline to help us navigate a situation that has no rules to guide us. Ethic's is a guide to help us navigate a rule that is wrong, unsafe, morally questionable, or the rule itself is illegal or imoral. Ethics allows us to stand up for what is right even when told to do something wrong.

Tank pressure, stamped on the side of a tank, it is NOT an ethical discussion.

If you'd like to take this 'off-line', feel free to do so. Publicly berating someone is also questionable.

 

[JahJahwarrior]

Good thing it's wrong to say anything bad about Sharkdiver or else this thread would get a long longer, real fast!

I've had my Faber LP steels up to 4200 though they cooled to 3900 in the water. I only fill my 72 to 3k, and only right before a dive (I don't like storing that tank full), but I have had a fill station guy forget that it was a 72 and pump it up to atleast 3600, maybe higher-- when he realized, he unhooked it and started draining without looking at the guage. Then he re-filled it to the proper pressure (he drained it to a little over 1k)

You can get into long arguments about DOT and what is law and rules and stuff like that, but isn't it more fun to dive? My doubles are sitting on the porch at 3900, my stage is full too, and I'm going to go pack the car and head to the caves. DA Aquamaster-- spot on, good post, enjoyed it!

 

[SparticleBrane]

We accidentally just had our double 72s filled to 3500. :shocked2:

My wife told the guy at the shop (where overfills tend to be a regular thing, so we have to specifically mention that we don't want these overfilled) "no more than 2500". As I said earlier, I don't see a reason to overfill when it isn't needed and we'd like to keep these 72s as long as possible, and we're just heading out to the quarry.

He put a note on the tanks about fill pressure for the other guy to fill them, and then he went to lunch. They were filled over lunch and then my wife came to pick them up after work.

"The other guy filled these while I was at lunch...let's check the pressure before you leave!"


...apparently the guy filling them missed the note and cranked 'em! They were up to 3600 by the time they got home. I drained them to 2700 once they got inside.

 

[JahJahwarrior]

I should add that I can see SharkDiver's point, about liability and being sued. That is why as a professional I will never advise you to overfill your tanks. However, until it has been proven unsafe, I will continue to fill my lp steel tanks to 3600-3900, because the marginal benefit seems to be greater than the marginal cost.

 

[redacted]

I think I started something...

Any Professional that gives advice or an answer, that is contrary to his or her certifying agency, the manufacture of the product, local, state or federal law is wrong.

My initial comment was to express my public dissapointment with people who have a "professional" designation with their nickname.

We are bound both ethically, code of conduct by our angencies, the law and by liability which doesn't allow us to just give answers people are looking for if they are contrary to those "Right answers".

We all have answers based on experience and the text book answers. These answers don't always agree, in fact they sometimes flat out conflict. As professionals, as people who can be held liable, we should refrain from giving any answer but the one that is in the text book to limit our liability.

We don't always have the luxury to give opinions, or answer questions sometimes the way we'd like to. I am "duty bound" (Legally, ethically, standards, law, liabilty) as is every other Instructor, Asst. Instructor, to give the so called "RIGHT" answer to certain questions.

I know I overfill my tanks on occassion, but publicly, when asked directly by someone the answer has to be NO as a dive professional.

The chances of a tank exploding, especially a steel one is remote, but there IS a chance. I'm not going to be the Instructor that said "yea, go ahead, it's not a big deal to put an extra 500lbs or more in your tank".

Diving safe, responsibly, and eliminating or mitigating as many risks as possible is our job. Giving someone advice that introduces risk, however small, is in my opinion is contrary to our obligation as an Instructor/Asst. Ins/DM.

So, move on with the topic. Sorry for inadverdantly causing it to be hickjacked....

Why not just stick with the facts and avoid the ethical quandary?

Tanks are marked with a fill pressure that includes a safety margin.

In some areas, certain tanks are routinely overfilled with no trends of ill effects.

BTW, advising (or teaching) someone to scuba introduces risks (however small) but you don't seem to have a problem with that!!!