Quiz - Visual Inspection Procedure - True/False 1

[tursiops]

Do I get the same amount of leeway?

Maybe. If the alternative is to underthink things, then yes. I have no idea what your mother tongue is!

 

[Storker]

I have no idea what your mother tongue is!

Deffo not English. Neither UK, US nor any other variety.

And no worries. I absolutely tend to overthink rather than underthink stuff.

 

[tursiops]

Deffo not English. Neither UK, US nor any other variety.

And no worries. I absolutely tend to overthink rather than underthink stuff.

LOL. Here I am trying to read between the lines to figure out exactly what you mean....

 

[Storker]

Here I am trying to read between the lines to figure out exactly what you mean....

Me, too.

But perhaps you and I ought to get a room and take this to PM. So we don't clutter up yet another Basic thread with off topic chatter?

 

[Boston Breakwater]

O.K. I'm new to Scubaboard. I'll probably have someone "Stand." on me for this.
Who's tank is it?
Who is doing the Inspection?
A shop? (Are you certified, qualified to do your own?
Steel, or aluminum?
How many cubic ft?
What kind of valve is on it?
What's the born on date?
Was hydrostatic testing done every 5 years?
Does it have a recently out dated V.I.P. Sticker?
Is it marked? Nitrox, Oxygen? What?
Would you crack the valve, and analyze it?
We're assuming its air......?
O.K. Let's assume it's air.
Let's assume it's aluminum.
Is it a 6351 alloy that has neck threads that are so badly damaged, cracked, and shoulder fatigue internally that your'e the lucky one that opens the valve and gets your knee cap blown out, or worse?
How would you even identify a 6351 alloy?
(Absolutely, no hijack...intended.)
Am I being over dramatic? (Maybe.)
Are these valid points to ponder?
Does normalization of deviance....
Ring a bell?
Maybe the question was posed too simply? (Maybe.)
Cheers.

 

[woodcarver]

Spoiler: Answer

False.

From the manual:

I understand the point of the manual, however, that is an answer to a different question. One that would consider the method of releasing (current action) the air contained in the cylinder.

The question at hand is simply whether air is air; how it got out is irrelevant, as it has already happened. Released, past tense.

It is interesting to see a bunch of engineers truly overthink a simple question. It's also a symptom of the way engineers tend to view and analyze the world...

 

[Brett Hatch]

@Boston Breakwater it sounds like your argument is like this:
1) there are a lot of variables, each of which may make this dangerous
2) many of the variables will be unknown
3) there may be unknown variables in addition to the ones you know about
4) therefore it is dangerous.

Is that a fair characterization? If so, I'd say that it is quite in the spirit of responding "false" to the question in the OP.

 

[woodcarver]

O.K. I'm new to Scubaboard. I'll probably have someone "Stand." on me for this.
Who's tank is it?
Who is doing the Inspection?
A shop? (Are you certified, qualified to do your own?
Steel, or aluminum?
How many cubic ft?
What kind of valve is on it?
What's the born on date?
Was hydrostatic testing done every 5 years?
Does it have a recently out dated V.I.P. Sticker?
Is it marked? Nitrox, Oxygen? What?
Would you crack the valve, and analyze it?
We're assuming its air......?
O.K. Let's assume it's air.
Let's assume it's aluminum.
Is it a 6351 alloy that has neck threads that are so badly damaged, cracked, and shoulder fatigue internally that your'e the lucky one that opens the valve and gets your knee cap blown out, or worse?
How would you even identify a 6351 alloy?
(Absolutely, no hijack...intended.)
Am I being over dramatic? (Maybe.)
Are these valid points to ponder?
Does normalization of deviance....
Ring a bell?
Maybe the question was posed too simply? (Maybe.)
Cheers.

This is a perfect example of what I just referenced....

None of this matters in regards to the OPs question, none.....

 

[saxman242]

The question at hand is simply whether air is air; how it got out is irrelevant, as it has already happened. Released, past tense.

I think it's a more ridiculous assumption to think the question is implying "a tank that contained air was open a while ago, so the air has now been released into the environment. Is this air dangerous?" than it is to think the question is implying "air from a tank has been released into the environment. As that air exits the tank, does it pose any risks?"

 

[saxman242]

None of this matters in regards to the OPs question, none.....

Exactly... if the answer to all those questions posed no extra risks, there would still be an embolism risk due to the release of pressurized air.