# Possibly a better alternative to the HF Pressure Pot?



## TonyL (Jul 9, 2014)

This just hit my Amazon account. I have no idea if it is any better than the HF one which goes for $80 after a 20% coupon.

http://www.amazon.com/Shop-Fox-W1799-Gallon-Paint/dp/B005W1CE4W/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

I wanted to add that I have been eyeing the CA Technologies P. I am even considering the Binks if I can buy it new without the regulator and gauges.


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 9, 2014)

The HF pot has a max pressure of 80 psi.  The Shop Fox one has a max pressure of 45 psi.  I'll stick with my HF pot.


----------



## vtgaryw (Jul 9, 2014)

I haven't bought a pressure pot yet, so I looked at the two of these closely.  It's hard to believe they aren't the same basic tank, looking at some of the details.

Although, the picture of the Shop Fox shows a 2" section of weld at two different places around the bottom of the pot.  Strange...

Gary


----------



## Crashmph (Jul 9, 2014)

vtgaryw said:


> I haven't bought a pressure pot yet, so I looked at the two of these closely.  It's hard to believe they aren't the same basic tank, looking at some of the details.
> 
> Although, the picture of the Shop Fox shows a 2" section of weld at two different places around the bottom of the pot.  Strange...
> 
> Gary



That is just a collar ring added to the bottom to make it stand up straight. The pot is actually teardrop shaped so it will not  have a welded seam to cause a week point.


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 9, 2014)

I assume that the pot itself has a curved bottom and that they've welded on a skirt or false bottom to give it a flat bottom.


----------



## TonyL (Jul 9, 2014)

I am calling Binks tomorrow. I heard theirs was the best. If it is possible to purchase without the gadgetry that I am likely to replace, perhaps it will lower the cost.

I asked Amazon about the Shop and Grizzly pots; they said they are made overseas.


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 10, 2014)

Binks makes some fine pots, but their basic 2 gallon model is rated at 80 psi max, just like the HF one.  Also, I can't find anything on their website that brags that it's made in America, so it's probably not.  It would not surprise me to find that these are made in the same factory as the HF ones.


----------



## edstreet (Jul 10, 2014)

TonyL said:


> I am calling Binks tomorrow. I heard theirs was the best. If it is possible to purchase without the gadgetry that I am likely to replace, perhaps it will lower the cost.
> 
> I asked Amazon about the Shop and Grizzly pots; they said they are made overseas.




45 psi or 80 psi, it's all low pressure and really it's quite worthless to compare because you are getting caught up and side tracked from the real issue of using a pressure pot.  It's still 2 bar difference, even at the high end it's a whopping 5 1/2 bars while the low end is at best 3 bars.


----------



## TonyL (Jul 10, 2014)

Good points. The motivation for my inquiries (to Binks, etc.) is due to the opinions shared by some, but not all, that the American-made pots or the more expensive pots are safer, and better made. I am most interested in safety  (not pressure capacity). Having said, I modified my friend's HF pot and have been in his shop while casting under pressure. I do understand that something can go wrong with a $1,000 pot the same way a $80 pot can "fail". I like doing the research.


----------



## edstreet (Jul 10, 2014)

Let me guess, he double plugged it?


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 10, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> Binks makes some fine pots, but their basic 2 gallon model is rated at 80 psi max, just like the HF one.  Also, I can't find anything on their website that brags that it's made in America, so it's probably not.  It would not surprise me to find that these are made in the same factory as the HF ones.



I can assure you, based on the 4 Binks pots I own, they are indeed made in USA.  Also, they are ASME CERTIFIED to 80 psi by a third party certification company, not rated to 80 psi.  There is a huge difference.  Each of my pots have been sent to a third party company who tested each and every one of them, then certified them.  Each of my pots have the name of the certification company, a unique serial number, the certification date, and the certified pressure stamped into the steel of the pot.  The HF pot was rated (not certified) by some Chinese dude who thought that number sounded good that day!:biggrin:

I have had a number of HF pots in my shop as well as my Binks.  The difference is night and day.  The lid on my Binks pot weighs more than the entire HF pot with lid.  This is not a guess, I actually weighed them both when I got my first Binks pot.

Here is a picture of the certification stamp on one of my pots to back up what I am saying:







And here is a picture of one of the clamps with USA cast into it:





I did not find a made in USA stamp on the pot itself but I do remember reading it in the literature that was in the pot when I got it.  Besides, when new, it did not smell like cosmoline so I am sure it came from the US!


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 10, 2014)

MesquiteMan said:


> sbell111 said:
> 
> 
> > Binks makes some fine pots, but their basic 2 gallon model is rated at 80 psi max, just like the HF one.  Also, I can't find anything on their website that brags that it's made in America, so it's probably not.  It would not surprise me to find that these are made in the same factory as the HF ones.
> ...


As I mentioned in my other post, Binks makes some fine pots.  Yours are probably awesome.  That being said, the rest of my post was referring to their basic 2 gallon pot which, based on the pictures on their website and the ones in your post, is not the same as the ones that you own.  Still, their basic ones might be made in the USA.  Like I posted before, my quick scan of their website didn't find that info.

(It should also be noted that regardless of the colorful commentary in your post, 80 psi is 80 psi, which is far more pressure than we need to cast blanks, anyway.)


----------



## TonyL (Jul 10, 2014)

I don't know what double-plugging is but we added a "better" quality 60 psi safety valve to the paint suction hole (removed/unscrewed the siphon tube) using  3/8 male by 1/4 brass adapter/bushing. Then screwed-in the male-threaded safety valve.

Where the HF regulator used to be, I added a brass (3-way) tee; to the left of the  tee, I added a ball-valve to control the air-inflow from the compressor (we also use it to release air assuming we want a more controlled pressure release than the safety valve provides). To the right side of the tee, I added the HF gauge which I am thinking of replacing with a better quality one. All fittings are secured with Teflon tape and a quick-disconnect was added to the air-intake/outtake ball valve.
I tested under pressure (45 psi) connections using Windex several times over several days.

Did I double-plug anything? Should I have double-plugged something? If so what?

Thanks for the question/answer.


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 10, 2014)

Not sure that you can get any more basic than the ones I own.  I just took a look at their site and don't see any lower model.  Mine are 83C-210 models from the PT zinc plated series.


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 10, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> (It should also be noted that regardless of the colorful commentary in your post, 80 psi is 80 psi.)



Yes but 80 psi rated and 80 psi certified are NOT the same thing, no matter how you want to colorfully paint it! :biggrin:


----------



## TonyL (Jul 11, 2014)

*Binks*



MesquiteMan said:


> Not sure that you can get any more basic than the ones I own.  I just took a look at their site and don't see any lower model.  Mine are 83C-210 models from the PT zinc plated series.



Thanks Curtis. I spoke to them today, that is the most basic for that size. With MSC's discount, it comes to $466.

Do you like the zinc better than the SS?


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 11, 2014)

I would see no reason at all to spend the exta money on ss.  I believe they are a LOT more expensive.  I have a Graco ASME Certified 5 gallon stainless pot and do not find the stainless any better than the zinc.


----------



## TonyL (Jul 11, 2014)

Thank you Curtis


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 11, 2014)

MesquiteMan said:


> sbell111 said:
> 
> 
> > (It should also be noted that regardless of the colorful commentary in your post, 80 psi is 80 psi.)
> ...



He's using a 60 psi safety valve.  80 > 60.


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 11, 2014)

Tony,  I believe you can do better than $466 on that pot.  Here are a couple options:

SARBCO.com  $336  I know nothing about this company but they do at least have their phone number on their site so you could call them.


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 11, 2014)

OK Steve  BTW, he does not even own a pressure pot yet and the Binks pot will come with its own 80 psi pressure relief valve


----------



## TonyL (Jul 11, 2014)

Thank you Curtis.  I am in no rush.  Have a good night/morning!


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 11, 2014)

Tony,  for some reason, the site linked above does not link directly to the page with the pot.  I am unable to get a direct link but here is their part number.  You can click on search and enter this and it will bring it right up:  *114843*


----------



## TonyL (Jul 11, 2014)

I "searched" and found it. Thank you Curtis.


----------



## ElMostro (Jul 11, 2014)

Hmm, I think that the quality of the Binks tanks must be in decline.  For starters they use at least one Chinese part; the pressure gauge.  So being a Chinese part "that can't be trusted" (maybe it's reading 80 psi but it really is more or less?) Needless to say, I took the gauge off my Binks and put it on my old HF pot.  If you look the pic you will see the Binks brand in the gauge dial and a "Made in China" sticker on the top of the gauge.  I also looked for any "Made in USA" stamps on the binks pot itself and found none, although the clamps are stamped with "USA".  I also weighed the lid on my binks and it weighed 6.8 LBS, my HF pot weighs 16.8 lbs, that is 10 lbs more than the binks lid.  To compare I weighed the lid on my 15 Gallon binks which is much larger than the 2.5 gallon Binks and it weighed 18.4 pounds...just 1.6 pounds more that the entire HF pot.  So is binks now using cheaper/lighter steel...maybe Chinese steel?


----------



## BJohn (Jul 11, 2014)

Tony, just finished my HF pot last night (actually night before) but last night i rearranged my fittings and pressurized it. All seems fine can't wait to get started casting some Alumilite.


----------



## BJohn (Jul 11, 2014)

Glad you mentioned the gauge on the HF pot, when I first pressurized the pot last night it seemed like it got up to 40psi real quick. A lot faster then when I thought then it kind of slowed down.

I have another guage think I will swap them out and do a comparison.

Like Curtis I see you in a couple of weeks at SWAT.


----------



## TonyL (Jul 11, 2014)

That gauge may be fine, and is still the one in use today. I am more concerned about it blowing. There are folks on here that have been pressurizing stuff for many more years than I have (I am going on two weeks on and off....it's not even my pot; I made it for a friend). I would rely much more heavily on the advice and experience of others. If I do buy/make a pot, it is likely to be a non-HF. Perhaps, I am throwing money out the window, but that is what i want to do with this piece of equipment. Enjoy!


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 11, 2014)

ElMostro said:


> Hmm, I think that the quality of the Binks tanks must be in decline.  For starters they use at least one Chinese part; the pressure gauge.  So being a Chinese part "that can't be trusted" (maybe it's reading 80 psi but it really is more or less?) Needless to say, I took the gauge off my Binks and put it on my old HF pot.  If you look the pic you will see the Binks brand in the gauge dial and a "Made in China" sticker on the top of the gauge.  I also looked for any "Made in USA" stamps on the binks pot itself and found none, although the clamps are stamped with "USA".  I also weighed the lid on my binks and it weighed 6.8 LBS, my HF pot weighs 16.8 lbs, that is 10 lbs more than the binks lid.  To compare I weighed the lid on my 15 Gallon binks which is much larger than the 2.5 gallon Binks and it weighed 18.4 pounds...just 1.6 pounds more that the entire HF pot.  So is binks now using cheaper/lighter steel...maybe Chinese steel?



Not too worried about my gauge blowing up!  Mine have different gauges than what you show in your picture.  Mine do not have the made in China on the sticker.  However, after purchasing over 1,000 vacuum gauges and being very familiar with gauge construction and quality, I would guess the gauges on my pot came from China too.  Regardless, this does not surprise or concern me.  Binks makes pressure pots, not gauges and again, I am not too worried about my gauge blowing up!

Not being able to find any USA stamps on my pots either, I decided to call Binks and find out first hand rather than supposition.  I talked to a fellow in tech support in Indiana.  He assure me that all of their pressure pots are indeed made in the USA and that every part of the pot itself is made in USA.

As for the weights, it has been a number of years since I destroyed my remaining HF pots after my lid blow off mishap so I can not double check.  I do remember weighing them when I first got the Binks pots.  I did it because the Binks lid just felt so much more substantial than the HF.  Then again, there have been at least two different versions of HF pots sold.  I have personally worked on two completely different versions over the years.  However, two of my Binks pots were purchased two years earlier than the other two and they are identical so I doubt Binks has changed anything.  Regardless, the code they are certified to has not changed any.

Basically, I am an admitted tool snob.  I have made my living with tools my entire life and I firmly subscribe to the philosophy that "Only a rich man can afford cheap tools".  I do know the Binks pots are made to a much higher standard than the HF pots and really appreciate the fact that my "bombs" are certified by a third party USA company (with USA liability insurance requirements) to American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) code not to blow up at 80 psi day in and day out.  That gives me peace of mind and is worth the $250 difference to me.


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 11, 2014)

Oh, and it seems that many have missed the underlying fundamentals of my posts on pressure pots.  It does not matter to me where they are made.  It is the ASME CERTIFICATION that is the difference for me.  I would not have an issue buying a China made pot if it was ASME *certified* instead of just being *rated* by some Chinese engineer. 

Remember, I have been in the same room when a pressure pot lid blew off.  Regardless of whose fault it was or why it happened, I can assure you that if it has happened to you, you too would be gun shy and looking for something better than a cheap Chinese copy (yes, the HF pot design is a copy of the Binks pot).  I was finding pieces of the plywood rack months later around my shop.  Thank the good Lord I was not standing next to it or I would most likely not be here!

Yes, my failure was most likely due to the modifications I had to make to keep the clamps from digging into the lid, thus keeping it from sealing properly.  However, after much more use with my Binks pots, I have not had the need to make any modifications.  The steel is that much thicker that I am not running into any problems with the clamps to where I would need to add reinforcements.

So, if you don't mind taking the risks in order to save $250, then the HF pot is golden for you.  Myself, I will stick to higher quality, American made, ASME certified pots.


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 11, 2014)

I think that you stated it quite well.  I don't modify how my clamps work, so those modifications cannot cause my pot to fail.  Therefore, my concerns about my HF pot failing are greatly reduced.  This along with always going through my personal 'proper tool use' checklist every time I use this tool and casting using much less pressure than 80 psi makes me super comfortable in continuing to use my HF pot.


----------



## Ice31 (Jul 27, 2014)

Ok guys.....you have sparked an extreme interest with me on this topic.  I have two HF pots...so you have successfully pulled me in.  I happen to manage a welding business that possesses an R-Stamp.  Which means that we can repair and modify ASME pressure vessels.  
- I am going to take a pot to work and put it through the testing requirements per the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC) just like we were going to tag a real alteration. 

- I'll have our engineer run the calculations on the HF pot as built to see what the pressure specs come out to be.

- We'll test the weld sizes and do a full hydro test (1.5 times the MAWP) to verify engineering design (I'll make sure to use a certified gage for quality assurance)

We'll see if we can get this thing to pop or if it is up to snuff with the engineering calcs. I may be blowing $80 but it'll be fun to see what happens. And then my mind will be at ease with my HF pot use. I'll post my findings......


----------



## TonyL (Jul 27, 2014)

That is nice of you to do that under the right conditions (especially safety). I am going to get a $200 pot, unless you bless this one. Nothing like a little pressure (pun intended!). Teasing of course.


----------



## TonyL (Jul 27, 2014)

I would be delighted to contribute $25 toward your research if the pot is not fit for use after your testing or if it fails. I will send you a vendor GC of your choice. Honor system. Thanks again!


----------



## Ice31 (Jul 27, 2014)

TonyL said:


> I would be delighted to contribute $25 toward your research if the pot is not fit for use after your testing or if it fails. I will send you a vendor GC of your choice. Honor system. Thanks again!



Tony,

Thank you for the nice gesture...no need for all that. Just happy to do my part.  I almost popped on a $200 Binks on craigslist but opted for the HF instead...and somehow in the ordering process HF messed up and sent me two pots. I called them to inform them and send it back or pay for it and they said just to keep it.  So I have a spare...I'll use it for this little project.  I'll take pics to show our process.  I'll take me a day or so to get the calcs back and get everything completed.

Aaron


----------



## TonyL (Jul 27, 2014)

Still nice of you. If I do use the hf, I will Change the fittings, safety, and guage. Which may bRing the cost up to 200 plus. We will see I guess. Thanks again


----------



## Ice31 (Jul 27, 2014)

TonyL said:


> Still nice of you. If I do use the hf, I will Change the fittings, safety, and guage. Which may bRing the cost up to 200 plus. We will see I guess. Thanks again



yeah...I stripped mine down to the couplings....bought some brass fittings used the included TEE....added a ball valve and quick disconnect for the air inlet/outlet..found some good safety valves on Amazon...I tried a couple different ones.  What I have found out is that the pop offs rated for 60psi release around 50-55psi...so I've looked at adjustable pop offs so I can dial in the setting that allows me to pressure up to 60psi without bleeding off or releasing.


----------



## Curly (Jul 27, 2014)

It would cost more for the tests but it would be interesting to know what the alloys used in the pot and lid are and how close they conform chemically and heat treat wise to the ones made on this continent. Disproving or confirmation of the oft made remarks about Chinese metals.


----------



## Ice31 (Jul 28, 2014)

Curly said:


> It would cost more for the tests but it would be interesting to know what the alloys used in the pot and lid are and how close they conform chemically and heat treat wise to the ones made on this continent. Disproving or confirmation of the oft made remarks about Chinese metals.



I could run a PMI on the pot, but I"m not sure the $200 would be that well spent.  I'll call the testing lab that I use and see if they will cut me a deal for the sake of personal endeavor and because I spend a lot of money with them already....I'll let you know


----------



## edstreet (Jul 28, 2014)

Ice31 said:


> Curly said:
> 
> 
> > It would cost more for the tests but it would be interesting to know what the alloys used in the pot and lid are and how close they conform chemically and heat treat wise to the ones made on this continent. Disproving or confirmation of the oft made remarks about Chinese metals.
> ...




Hate to break bubbles or anything and I am not trying to derail what is going on here but I think we both know the burst pressure of these pots and the outcome of the test.  Regardless of the number range or even the material type that it is there are a good hefty number of questions which will not be answered by doing these tests.  By all means do the test if you want but ask yourself these:  Do they conform to a strict standard in which the material type MUST be adhered to and what is the spec on the material composition?  We both know they can and will change according to lot numbers so any testing that you perform does not equate to every pot that is sold conforming to the same spec.

The other issue in this is lets say you do arrive at the burst pressure, which is actually easy to find without doing these test  what is to stop people here from seeing that data then performing some grossly unsafe practices because of it? Citing this thread as proof of reliability and be in the unsafe region with a false sense of security.


The simple fact remains it's not about what pressure they will explode at or what material they are composed of.  Any student of hyperbarics can very quickly spot the weakness in this approach.


----------



## Ice31 (Jul 28, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Ice31 said:
> 
> 
> > Curly said:
> ...



You would be correct, except that i never said that I was going to or did I ever intended to take the vessel to burst pressure.  Because that doesn't much prove anything except that I wasted my time. I simply stated that I was going to run the same testing that any ASME stamped vessel would be put through to see if the design and the statement of PSI rating is credible.  As for the material you are correct, there is no way of knowing lot for lot what they would be using.  But it will give me an indication of the type of material they are choosing to use as a whole.  I'll be able to see if this specific pot material conforms to any ASME rated material of if they are using some non-tested "home recipe" for material.  More testing is never a bad thing.....how people choose to use the information would be up to them.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 28, 2014)

*Interesting thread.*

I found this an interesting thread particularily since I don't intend to use a pressure pot for anything myseld.  That being said, I do have to agree with Curtis that there is surely a difference between certified and rated... and if I were looking at an item that has exploding as one of it's failure mechanisms I would go with certified.  

Now those who say certified will not tell you at what pressure it will explode are correct but certified will tell you that it has been actually tested to show at what pressure it will not explode.

Rated - well the individual pots might not be tested at all and I'm certain that I want anything that has the potential to cause me serious injury if it fails to actually undergo some serious testing.


----------



## ElMostro (Jul 28, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> I found this an interesting thread particularily since I don't intend to use a pressure pot for anything myseld.  That being said, I do have to agree with Curtis that there is surely a difference between certified and rated... and if I were looking at an item that has exploding as one of it's failure mechanisms I would go with certified.
> 
> Now those who say certified will not tell you at what pressure it will explode are correct but certified will tell you that it has been actually tested to show at what pressure it will not explode.
> 
> Rated - well the individual pots might not be tested at all and I'm certain that I want anything that has the potential to cause me serious injury if it fails to actually undergo some serious testing.




Smitty, that is the main issue that has not been proven...the whole "exploding" tank thing.  There have been plenty of posts over the years about the "elusive exploding HF tank" and I have searched many a place and for the life of me I cannot a single verifiable example of this ever occurring but it comes up again and again not just at IAP but at least one other forum I visit.  Why do I care?  Well, of my 12 active pressure pots 5 are HF pots that I run at least 2-3 casting cycles a day each at 80 psi and other than an occasional RAR event due to gasket failure they perform just fine.  If these things REALLY explode all the time then with as much as I use my HF tanks they would be a prime candidate for an "explosion" and given that I am somewhat of a reasonable individual I would not like that to happen in my shop.


----------



## TonyL (Jul 28, 2014)

While we are on the subject...has anyone found a better gasket material or a way to ameliorate the one that HF uses?


----------



## edstreet (Jul 28, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> Now those who say certified will not tell you at what pressure it will explode are correct but certified will tell you that it has been actually tested to show at what pressure it will not explode.




Certified only yields you serious insight into stress fractures with in the materials on expansion due to pressure.  It is an indication for life span of the material and when you need to remove it from service. If you really want to look at standards, quality and the like then you need the ultrasound machine.

I have seen a number of 'certified' tanks explode due to double plugging and other abusive practices.  I should also send my dive buddy a link to this thread so he can get a good laugh, he use to work at the US Navy Experimental Dive Center (NEDU) in Panama City, Florida doing testing, both destructive and non.  He is also a saturation diver.  Some of the horror stories he has is just down right sickening.

We also know that most failures and the like will be from seals, gaskets, couples and fittings.


----------



## ElMostro (Jul 28, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > Now those who say certified will not tell you at what pressure it will explode are correct but certified will tell you that it has been actually tested to show at what pressure it will not explode.
> ...



Ed, I re-read the whole thread and missed the funny part...where is the humor?


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 28, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > Now those who say certified will not tell you at what pressure it will explode are correct but certified will tell you that it has been actually tested to show at what pressure it will not explode.
> ...


 I have admittedly not looked into the specific certification standards involved...

I presume any certified tanks you saw explode were subjected to pressure beyond what they were certified to withstand.

I agree completely that you will see a lot more seal failures, etc than exploding tanks - at least I hope like heck you would.

That being said and not being completely unversed in certification in general - particularily to US Government MIL-Specs - I will stand by what I said earlier.


----------



## BSea (Jul 28, 2014)

edstreet said:


> We also know that most failures and the like will be from seals, gaskets, couples and fittings.


This is actually a good thing. A failed seal isn't catastrophic.  It might make some noise, but it isn't dangerous.  Ask you dive buddy about blown tank valve o-rings.  Other than having it happen at depth (which I've never heard of), it's no big deal. Just some loud pop, and a lot of hissing till the valve is turned off.

And as far as double plugging, what do you mean by that regarding pressure pots?  I understand what you mean for a scuba tank.

I'm really interested in Ice31's hydro test.  At 1.5 X max rated pressure, that should be a pretty good indicator. So if a HF pot will hold at 120 PSI (80 x 1.5), it should make us feel a little better at running the pressure up to 60.


----------



## Ice31 (Jul 28, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > Now those who say certified will not tell you at what pressure it will explode are correct but certified will tell you that it has been actually tested to show at what pressure it will not explode.
> ...




Your friend has a very cool job...that being said the tanks he is involved with, i assume, are formed or extruded tanks not welded vessels. Diving tanks are made in much the same fashion at welding gas tanks and operate at a much higher PSI than a casting pressure pot. Hydro testing a pot this size at such a low pressure is virtually harmless so we'll move forward as planned.  I do appreciate EDSTREET's concern over this process and he brings up some very good points.  

We deal with pressure vessels of all types....from 6 gal "bottle tanks", 1,000 gal ammonia "wagons", 30,000 ammonia tanks and all the way up to 160,000 gal butane, propane, NG storage tanks. We have to follow a strict code of testing to re-certify a vessel after we have repaired, altered, or re-rated it...following the same practices on my HF tank will give me the same piece of mind as any other tank we work on.  

All "certified" means is that it's been engineered, the process has been proved and destructively tested, material is traceable, and it has been manufactured and tested to a code of standards, mostly ASME, that are recognized industry wide.....so in essence if I can swing the material PMI and find out that it matches a standard ASME recognized material recipe out of ASME Sec. II, part D, and then get the calcs back and prove the design can handle the 60psi MAWP, add on PT of the welds, UT of the shell and head, and finalize it all with a hydro test...I'm not sure what else would be present in a "certified" tank...

And at the end of the day we will still be left with...

1) the weakest point is the open joint and that is were the failure would occur
2) it's made in China...which for some people is a deal breaker
3) It's still a $80 HF pot that some wouldn't use if you paid them to
4) I had some fun doing the testing, and never intended the results to "change the world" of HF pressure pots


PS......all asme certified tanks post 1999 are made to a 3.5:1 safety factor....meaning if the MAWP is 60 then the Max BURST is more than likley 210psi....before '99 the safety factor was 4:1...I believe it changed back in 1968 to the 4:1 and before that was 5:1.....all changed because of the uniformity of the manufacturing process of the material.  As the process has been more refined over the decades so has the quality of the steel produced. thus the safety factor dropping.


----------



## edstreet (Jul 28, 2014)

Ice31 said:


> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> > Smitty37 said:
> ...




In the manual they state 200psi   I was going to originally post that but I was reminded of many of the issues I posted earlier about and wanted to clear the air first.





BSea said:


> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> > We also know that most failures and the like will be from seals, gaskets, couples and fittings.
> ...



Double plugged references over pressure valves and similar devices. The burst disc that fails at a certain pressure range.  Designed to fail to save the system from something nasty.  There have been many that would add 2+ disc to increase the pressure needed so they could over fill the tanks.  The 'plug' references electrical junction boxes with the break out circle plugs.  i.e. defeating safety systems so you can do unsafe practices.  In our case a seal that ruptures at 60 psi gets replaced with a seal that ruptures at 200 psi so someone could use a higher pressure.

Even still a failed seal can spew materials all over the area and you will be finding things weeks to come.  If it's a gauge that blows you can have plexiglass and all the other internal mechanisms acting as a grenade and while it may not be fatal it would be major suckage.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 28, 2014)

Aquick check of ASME yielded this general statement:

Certification

A certificate will be granted by ASME *only after the applicant successfully demonstrates the implementation of their quality program to the ASME review/survey team.* After ASME reviews the report submitted by the review/survey team, the Society will either authorize the issuance of the certificate or request additional action by the applicant. Certificate Holders may request changes to their certificates after issuance. (MY emphasis)  

It seems to be saying that in order to get certification an appropriate quality control system *must* be in place.  Which would imply to me that at least some actual testing of certified pots is taking place - I have seen few quality control systems that do no require at least some physical testing.


----------



## MesquiteMan (Jul 28, 2014)

Smitty,

According to the tech support person I spoke with at Binks, each of their pots are individually tested before certification.  Thus the unique serial number and date of certification on each pot.



Smitty37 said:


> Aquick check of ASME yielded this general statement:
> 
> Certification
> 
> ...


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 28, 2014)

MesquiteMan said:


> Smitty,
> 
> According to the tech support person I spoke with at Binks, *each of their pots are individually tested before certification.*  Thus the unique serial number and date of certification on each pot.
> 
> ...


That's kind of what my contention was.  I seriously doubt any manufacturer can get certified without physical testing.


----------



## Ice31 (Aug 24, 2014)

So sorry that it has taken me so long to get back to this....after running the hydro test and have the engineering calculations performed it does boil down to the material used.  Assuming that a standard gaged sheet metal was used the calculations show that the pot can easily take pressure up to 120psi.  The weak point as we all know is the gasket sealing surface and bolts.  Remember the MAWP is 60psi for these pots...and the max pressure is 80psi.  That means that the pot is meant to work at 60 psi and can handle spikes to 80psi.  I am not going to spend the money at this time to have the PMI done to see what material is used in the pot.  If and when I do I'll have a conclusive report as to what the pot is engineered to handle.  

This information does't really change anything in my opinion except that I have a little more confidence in the pot that I use.  I have still installed a safety chain to the lid in case of a clamp failure. So if the lid were to give way the lid wouldn't go anywhere.  Can't be too safe.


----------



## TonyL (Aug 24, 2014)

Thank you for performing and sharing the "report".


----------

