Scuba tank explosion - man loses hand

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!

It really surprises me that the tanks are never contained when filled. Our cascade system for filling fire service SCBA bottles (carbon-wrapped aluminum, 4500 PSI) has a heavy steel compartment, with the tanks inside further steel containment.
 
Yes I know it will effect costs but nothing is worth what Murray has lost!
 
Is there worker's compensation/national health care in Australia? Who is going to pay the bill? Liability of the shop? It was one of their own rental tanks!
 
Is there worker's compensation/national health care in Australia? Who is going to pay the bill? Liability of the shop? It was one of their own rental tanks!

Yes Workcover oversee safe work environments and practices and investigates breaches, injuries makes recommendations and issues fines where they deem appropriate.

Yes there is a basic National Health cover but it has limits.

Liability of and insurance and so on will be determined as a result of the investigation.

How all that will play out remains to be seen. This is a situation where a long term employee and friend was injured and there are issues around that as well.
 
Yes, it is a difficult situation. It would be shame to have this be the demise of the shop. I'm sure everyone involved doesn't want that to happen. Disability is a relative matter. If I lost a hand it would be devastating to my career, a foot I could manage.
 
Sas ... annual hydro is LAW ... one of the few things that is law for diving
Do they use really small stamps? Stickers? If not, what happens when you run out of shoulder on the tank? The shoulder is marked as the metal is thicker and the damage from the stamp itself is less critical, but if you run oiut of prime real estate and start marking close to the side walls or close to the neck you are going to weaken the tank or aggravate any potential SLC issues in the neck by creating stress risers. A 20 year old tank in Oz is apparently going to have 100 years worth of hydro test stamps due to this law.

Then there is the issue of annual hydro testing itself and what that may mean in regard to the much more rapid propagation of SLC cracks.

Just my opinion but requiring 500% more hydro tests than is really needed causes more problems than it solves. You gain absolutely nothing in terms of greater safety, yet incur an undetermined cost and risk potential unnintended consequences - poor legislation at best. It would be tragically ironic if a law that was written to be way over the top in terms of conservatism under the illusion that it would increase safety contributed to this failure.
 
Yes, it is a difficult situation. It would be shame to have this be the demise of the shop. I'm sure everyone involved doesn't want that to happen. Disability is a relative matter. If I lost a hand it would be devastating to my career, a foot I could manage.

Losing both is devastating. using crutches and learning to use a prostetic leg with one hand:shakehead:

Do they use really small stamps? Stickers? If not, what happens when you run out of shoulder on the tank? The shoulder is marked as the metal is thicker and the damage from the stamp itself is less critical, but if you run oiut of prime real estate and start marking close to the side walls or close to the neck you are going to weaken the tank or aggravate any potential SLC issues in the neck by creating stress risers. A 20 year old tank in Oz is apparently going to have 100 years worth of hydro test stamps due to this law.

Then there is the issue of annual hydro testing itself and what that may mean in regard to the much more rapid propagation of SLC cracks.

Just my opinion but requiring 500% more hydro tests than is really needed causes more problems than it solves. You gain absolutely nothing in terms of greater safety, yet incur an undetermined cost and risk potential unnintended consequences - poor legislation at best. It would be tragically ironic if a law that was written to be way over the top in terms of conservatism under the illusion that it would increase safety contributed to this failure.

I am sorry I don't get the maths.. how can a 20 year old tank have 100 years of hydro test stamps? yes the stamps are quite small.
 
Still no news on exactly which tank this was?
I've been searching the net trying to find out something else...
Does anyone know if there's ever been a catastrophic failure of a 6061 tank?
Have ALL of the failures been 6351? All the reports I can find that specify the tank are on 6351.
 
I can't tell you anything more than it was an aluminum tank, in test and one of their rentals... I suspect it was a luxifer(?) but can not confirm that. I will not reveal my sources but I will not relay information I am not certain of as fact.
 
The 100 year of stamps thing that DA is referring to is (I think) a 5 year interval we have verses an every year interval
 

Back
Top Bottom