Tank testing legality

[Welshd1k]

So biught a tank that was sold to me as 2019 but turns out it 2016 the seller is stating that tanks under 1l don't legally need to be re tested. Can't find any laws online etc any advice 

 

[Tommikka]

So biught a tank that was sold to me as 2019 but turns out it 2016 the seller is stating that tanks under 1l don't legally need to be re tested. Can't find any laws online etc any advice 

‘Under 1 litre’ is wrong 

A 48ci cylinder is subject to testing, which is about 0.78litres

What cylinder type/size do you have?

What a site will accept may vary, but in the UK:

an aluminium 3000psi cylinder has a test cycle of 10 years, but have generally been marked as 5 years.

A ‘standard’ aluminum 3000psi is sized at 0.48ci

A 13ci aluminum 3000psi cylinder is test exempt and has an unlimited life, subject to visual checks

TPED regulations cover the EU & UK legal requirements and cylinders under these have the Pi mark

Trevor of Armoulite/HPAC is an authoritative contact,  can confirm status and do the testing as an IDEST centre

 

[Welshd1k]

I was pretty sure it needed every 5 years but the seller is addimant it isn't and telling me there's no law on it. Its a 48ci tippman steel bottle 

View attachment 95973

View attachment 95974

 

[Guest]

My local dive shop has told me there isn’t a legal or recommended check for 48ci and smaller tanks, but never looked into it

 

[Tommikka]

I was pretty sure it needed every 5 years but the seller is addimant it isn't and telling me there's no law on it. Its a 48ci tippman steel bottle 

View attachment 95973

View attachment 95974

That’s aluminium not steel (Actusl steel bottles were a thing)

Yours is therefore valid for 10 years from July 2016 (2016/07)

But the printing may still show a contradictory 5 year due date

 

[Welshd1k]

OK perfect and then mu carbon is 5 years correct 

View attachment 95991

 

[Tommikka]

OK perfect and then mu carbon is 5 years correct 

View attachment 95991

Yes - a 5 year cycle is correct

If it’s Pi marked then look for the summary markings (example below)

But there could be a variation on total life.

The default has always been 15 year maximum, but a new ISO design could have an unlimited lifetime.

However many manufacturers are producing ISO cylinders with a 15 year life marked, so don’t have unlimited life

(I will turn a blind eye to a good condition Pi aluminum that has 5 years printed rather than 10 which will run off,  but won’t be turning a blind eye to fibre markings)

There should be another set of markings, like on here:

Note on the top dial that this still has air in it, but it is currently out of test and cannot be refilled.

View attachment 95998

Near the middle is the Pi gate symbol, so it’s UK & European legal

To the right of that is ‘2010/01’ (manufactured January 2010, and was therefore due for testing in 2015)

Left and down a bit is the final date of 2025/01 (therefore it becomes a paperweight from February 2025)

The big yellow sticker shows testing at July 2016 (which means it could not be used for all of 2015 and half of 2016, and also that the test expired in July 2021)

I can technically use the air that is in there, but cannot fill it as the test has expired. When I get around to testing I will not get a further 5 years as it’s final date is 2025

My local dive shop has told me there isn’t a legal or recommended check for 48ci and smaller tanks, but never looked into it

I’m going to say that they are wrong 

Under 48ci and I agree with them 

The other point they might have meant could be that with the cost of new vs testing that it’s not worth testing a 48ci aluminum 

The guru is Trevor of HPAC

(There is a technical element on the legal status ….. TPED compliance affects the filling and transporting)

If you’re not commercial (and do not have a company car) then you can wiggle your way out of transporting 

If you manage to self fill then that’s down to you, but a site cannot (should not) permit you to fill an out of date cylinder 

Back in the day some paintball sites turned a blind eye to scuba self fills in the car park of US specification fibre cylinders - they would refuse it at the site fill station but ignore use on the field

 

[Welshd1k]

OK so this tank has unlimited life? Where can I get it tested as my local dive place won't do carbon composite tanks 

View attachment 96005

 

[Tommikka]

OK so this tank has unlimited life? Where can I get it tested as my local dive place won't do carbon composite tanks 

View attachment 96005

Yes/maybe - that can be unlimited due to the ISO standard 

Scan around for anything else, you have the born date of 2016/11, and as long as they have not sneaked in a death date then you do have an unlimited cylinder.

You can get tests done by either a test centre or a middle man.

The preferred test centre is Armourlite/HPAC as they are the lead air providers to paintball (and where applicable airsoft) sites 

http://hpac-armourlite.co.uk

Any IDEST approved centre can run tests (dive shops often take in testing, either as a test centre in their own right or they pass them through a test centre)

https://www.sita.org.uk/idest/idest_members.php
 

(But as you’ve found not every dive shop is friendly - I used a dive place in Salisbury once with a friendly guy, they didn’t do testing but held on to it and sent it as part of a few bottles in a batch. (I was in no hurry)

But when I went back with others a different guy didn’t like paintballers and according to him they never test out bottles 

(So I hung onto them and dropped them off with HPAC at an event to pick up at another)

 

[Welshd1k]

Got the carbon tank done in bristol and was 22 quid does that seem the norm I've got a 12l one I need to get tested but nowhere wants to test it 

 

[Tommikka]

Got the carbon tank done in bristol and was 22 quid does that seem the norm I've got a 12l one I need to get tested but nowhere wants to test it 

I’ve seen prices as cheap as £15 (a few years ago) but would expect £30 to £40

A test centre can slim down the price when you’re bringing it in and collecting later, so £22 is a fair price 

The principle remains the same for larger cylinders and one of the IDEST centres will be able to do it.

There are different regimes for diving cylinders that are used to dive, with some references below about hydro and visual inspection cycles for diving and just hydro testing for surface cylinders (random test centre from Google)

http://teigndivingcentre.co.uk/prices/cylinder-testing-prices

 

[Point Two Balls]

Hi @Tommikka

I have a 26CI bottle which has an ISO marking, a Rho gate TT thing and was born in August 2021.

Will this need a check in August 2026 or it exempt (maybe) because of a) it's size and b) it's ISO marking?

Thanks,

Pat.

 

[Tommikka]

Hi @Tommikka

I have a 26CI bottle which has an ISO marking, a Rho gate TT thing and was born in August 2021.

Will this need a check in August 2026 or it exempt (maybe) because of a) it's size and b) it's ISO marking?

Thanks,

Pat.

The ISO wouldn’t make a cylinder exempt from hydrotesting - Certain types of fibre under ISO standards can be exempt from a final date.  (Aluminiums would not normally have a final date)

The size situation of a compact aluminium can exempt them from hydrotests.  I would guess that a 26ci has a narrow circumference, but probably over 2”

The general guidance on exemption is a diameter of 2” (thats from the American standards).   Give HPAC a call, I would confirm with Trevor on what’s in/out of scope for compact

For an aluminum they typically get marked by manufacturers as due testing at the 5 year point but would be UK legal for 10 years from manufacture

http://hpac-armourlite.co.uk

 

[The_Lord_Poncho]

With respect to the title of this thread, I wonder I'm correct in that, ownership and indeed, use of tanks that are past their testing dates is not actually unlawful. But rather the relevant regulations place restrictions and duties upon employers as opposed to private users of such kit.

Of course, if that is true, then it places a duty on sites - for the protection of their workers - to pay attention to the testing dates etc, but does not mean that anyone using an out of date tank is likely to have their collar felt by the law. Unless it all goes badly wrong.

 

[GiantKiwi]

With respect to the title of this thread, I wonder I'm correct in that, ownership and indeed, use of tanks that are past their testing dates is not actually unlawful. But rather the relevant regulations place restrictions and duties upon employers as opposed to private users of such kit.

Of course, if that is true, then it places a duty on sites - for the protection of their workers - to pay attention to the testing dates etc, but does not mean that anyone using an out of date tank is likely to have their collar felt by the law. Unless it all goes badly wrong.

After a long discussion with the local dive shop - the only problem you're ever going to encounter is that getting it filled will be the problem when its out of date - if like me you're decanting off a bigger bottle, which is appropriately tested, the problem is moot. 

However for me, when the little bottle goes to its death, i'll just be buying a new one as its not all that expensive to replace with aluminium.

A lot of the dive shops in Scotland however, will huff and puff if ask them to do anything with a carbon fibre bottle - some will demand it tested by their centre prior to filling, regardless of its age and others will flat out refuse regardless.

 

[Point Two Balls]

The ISO wouldn’t make a cylinder exempt from hydrotesting - Certain types of fibre under ISO standards can be exempt from a final date.  (Aluminiums would not normally have a final date)

The size situation of a compact aluminium can exempt them from hydrotests.  I would guess that a 26ci has a narrow circumference, but probably over 2”

The general guidance on exemption is a diameter of 2” (thats from the American standards).   Give HPAC a call, I would confirm with Trevor on what’s in/out of scope for compact

For an aluminum they typically get marked by manufacturers as due testing at the 5 year point but would be UK legal for 10 years from manufacture

http://hpac-armourlite.co.uk

Great info - many thanks. Just to confirm, my tank is ali, is 2.5" diameter. Will see how it looks on it's 5 year birthday and then decide to replace, get it checked, or risk keeping on using it if it's still pristine until someone questions it or it gets to 10 years old, when I will get it checked - I'm guessing this could be normal practise for a lot of folk. I fill it myself with a stirrup pump as I like the exerice!

 

[Tommikka]

With respect to the title of this thread, I wonder I'm correct in that, ownership and indeed, use of tanks that are past their testing dates is not actually unlawful. But rather the relevant regulations place restrictions and duties upon employers as opposed to private users of such kit.

Of course, if that is true, then it places a duty on sites - for the protection of their workers - to pay attention to the testing dates etc, but does not mean that anyone using an out of date tank is likely to have their collar felt by the law. Unless it all goes badly wrong.

Relevant legislation and regulations cover transportation and operating fill stations etc, then add the legal issues of HSE compliance even if not a direct legislative requirement 

These do apply commercially and generally don’t apply to individuals.

Be aware if you have a works provided vehicle, even a salary offset car etc - as then commercial transportation does apply.  You ought to inform the insurer and display relevant triable/diamond warning stickers 

(Private vehicles are not required to display the HPA cylinder symbol to carry a playing cylinder - but as discussed with a firefighter friend they would be happier to see the sticker and be prepared than to be cutting into a crushed car and discover an unknown cylinder or cut through one)

Sites are obliged to check self fill and staff fill cylinders, plus have a responsibility to keep staff and other customers safe

Back in the day there were paintballers using scuba cylinders to self fill on site when either the site only ran CO2 or they were using DOT/TC cylinders with a blind eye turned.  

This slackness bred and bad practices spread, using unrestricted fast fill stations and youngsters self filling 

Everyone suddenly paid attention when a series of failures occured in the UK and Europe in rapid succession.

One case was a full flash fill explosion of the regulator and cylinder with hospitalisation (luckily “only” chemical burns and “minor” melting of his jersey) the rest tended to be burst disk failures

Mostly attributed to slack procedures (including 3000psi cylinders on 4500psi fill stations),dirt contamination, heat (fast fills) and the burst disks failing due to those combinations, some cases of self fitted/changed regulators not correctly fitted and/or thread damage - causing bottle rockets etc  

The explosion was fully investigated by HSE, it involved a specific ultralight cylinder type (of the brand “safer”) which affected their reputation but was not the cylinder design at fault - the problem was oil contamination attributed to a previous users bad maintenance contaminating the fill station and the fast fill generating heat at pressure plus oil contamination causing an explosion 

The relevant legislation may not apply to individuals directly but it does affect us all - not necessarily impacting on the individual with bad habits but the others around