TargetTalk

Rover wrote:Now the count is fifteen with no answer.

You might not have had an answer of who will do it, but you've had an answer of why they might not.

Im sorry this is a convoluted answer. The European pressure vessel laws for high pressure cylinders set the requirements for manufacture, test and maintenance in the EU and appear to be incorporated as an appendix in US laws. A while back I made a quick study of the applicable portion of ths tables and noticed that cylinders of under 1/2 liter capacity appear to be unregulated with respect periodic inspection due to a figure in the appendix setting a 1/2 liter floor to cylinder capacity. Hypothesising for a moment, I can think of no reusable refillable small capacity compressed air cans in service, but the paintball guys have a lot of CO2 bottles of small size. It appears that the law recogises that a number of small cylinders exist and by design are uninspectable. The industry seems to deal with this by applying end of life dates. We accomplish this by applying manufacturing dates to the vessel. This allows us to amend the the lifespan without having confusing date issues. It appears we are no different than other low capacity cylinders that are end of lifed by statute off of manufaturing dates.
Understanding this, it seems to be impossible to establish a servicing methodology when the industries command media is specifically exempting cylinders of this size class from servicing. If the command media does not mandate a specific recertification/inspection methodology, it becomes impossible for an individual accomplish this and comply with law.
I can see where the industry sets lifespans on these type of small capacity cylinders, I haven't found where the 10 years requirement is codified but itseems logical. Having ISSF restate that as a rule seems consistent with pressure vessel law, and I'm still good with it.....

Rover wrote:Now the count is fifteen with no answer.

As far as I can see, the various CO2 cylinders are all fairly simple affairs, yes, some need a "special" tool to remove the valve but CO2 rated "O" rings are just pennies. I'm very surprised that no-one is selling a reseal kit including the correct tool and an instruction sheet for DIY maintenence. It's really not rocket science and the worst that would happen when you put it back together again is that it would still leak.

These pervs have absolutely no concern with YOUR safety...


I'm sure there are many like them among you.

Rover wrote:I constantly see people unhappy because their out-of-date AP cylinders no longer hold air. They care not that they are no longer legal in competition.

Is there no one out there who can/will rebuild these orphans?

I'm sure there is someone somewhere, just as I am sure there is someone somewhere willing and able to recharge ballpoint pen refills or refurbish used Q-Tips, however:

1. No-one would be willing to pay the cost - the parts, the repair, the liability insurance - I'm sure it would all come to close to or more than the price of a new cylinder
2. There wouldn't be a lot of point, as they couldn't then be used in competition
3. Most people are perfectly comfortable not spending their life whining about the $20/yr amortised cost of replacing their air cylinders every 10 years or so but would rather spend their time shooting and doing other fun things

Nineteen.

Rover,

Lots of people have told you WHY there is no such service.

In case you can't read between the lines, the answer to your original question is NO.

I'm not sure the 10year expiration is based on any real data. Why not develop testing like they do for SCUBA tanks to determine if they are still good, get them re-certified every x number of years.

I mean if your filling your AP tank once a day verses the guy that fills it once or twice a week why are they both bad after 10 years??
- Dave

dronning wrote:I'm not sure the 10year expiration is based on any real data. Why not develop testing like they do for SCUBA tanks to determine if they are still good, get them re-certified every x number of years.

I mean if your filling your AP tank once a day verses the guy that fills it once or twice a week why are they both bad after 10 years??
- Dave

It isn't, because before the ISSF came out with the 10 year rule, several manufacturers rated their cylinders for 20 years, including Morini & Hammerli. The 10 year rule is completely artificial, and there quite a few cynics who believe the ISSF was talked (or even bribed) into it by a pistol manufacturer to increase sales of cylinders.

"Rover,

Lots of people have told you WHY there is no such service."

Followed by:

"The 10 year rule is completely artificial."

OK THAT I'll buy.

dronning wrote:Why not develop testing like they do for SCUBA tanks to determine if they are still good, get them re-certified every x number of years.

Because its just not worth the effort in time, cost or risk. It may be for a SCUBA tank which is $300-400, not for an airgun tank which is $100-$200 if that.

Perhaps we'd like to go over to the system of an annual inspection at ~$30-50 per year and likely have the tanks condemned after 10-15 years.
Five year inspections are not enough apparently, so I'm actually surprised we have a 10 year life at all.
http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/x ... 56789/9293

Maybe it would be easier to stop whining over the cost of 2-3 cups of coffee per year.

All of you are missing it. Pressure vessel laws do not allow inspection or recertification of high pressure compressed air tanks sized below 1/2 liter in size. The inspection and recertification methods in the law start to be usable at 1/2 liter and larger. Cylinders smaller than that are end of lifed, by law, based on time in service. Its not a matter of economics, recertification is illegal and there is no approved method published. The 10 year ISSF rule is only a restatement of international pressure vessel law, and I suspect it is there to protect the ISSF from actions by regulators for not having a control on pressure vessel filling by contest personell.......

It appears the real answer to the question
of why no one provides the service is
because it would be illegal. The only way to
change this would by statute which in itself would
be a long and costly affair that would no
doubtidly drive the cost of said service equal to,
if not grater than, replacement cost.

Twenty five.

spektr wrote:All of you are missing it. Pressure vessel laws do not allow inspection or recertification of high pressure compressed air tanks sized below 1/2 liter in size. The inspection and recertification methods in the law start to be usable at 1/2 liter and larger. Cylinders smaller than that are end of lifed, by law, based on time in service. Its not a matter of economics, recertification is illegal and there is no approved method published. The 10 year ISSF rule is only a restatement of international pressure vessel law, and I suspect it is there to protect the ISSF from actions by regulators for not having a control on pressure vessel filling by contest personell.......

Please cite the international law that says the service life of cylinders smaller than 1/2 liter is 10 years. The absence of a regulation describing recertification also does not indicate that it is illegal.

Unless a law was put into effect about the time the ISSF adopted it as a rule, the 20 year life of Morini and Hammerli cylinders before then suggests that there is no such law. I have checked US Department of Transportation Regulations, and they basically do not regulate them, presumably because they view the safety hazard from small cylinders to be not worth the bother.

Rover wrote:Twenty five.

Eventually even you might take the hint from the responses you have received.

Few people will say "nobody will do it" because, somewhere, there might be someone who is prepared to ignore any legal/liability issues for such a small sum of money.

"Eventually even you might take the hint from the responses you have received."


Yes....you were response number twenty-seven, but I still haven't received an answer.

In answer to the original question, the answer appears to be apparently not.

FYI I have two (perfectly functioning) Steyr AP cylinders which I've retired due to the ten year rule.

Rover wrote:"Eventually even you might take the hint from the responses you have received."

Yes....you were response number twenty-seven, but I still haven't received an answer.

If you bothered to read the posts, I gave you a very succinct answer quite some time ago: http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php ... b4#p282486

What part of "NO" did you not understand?

Rover wrote:Yes....you were response number twenty-seven, but I still haven't received an answer.

There are only two possible answers:-

1) Yes, there is no one.
2) No, there is someone.

You haven't had anybody answer 2), so answer 1) is looking likely.

It is not possible to offer 1) as an answer unless you have checked with every person in the US (or wider afield).