Rearming lifejackets

DoubleEnder

DoubleEnder

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 Apr 2002
Messages
1,554
Location
N Hemisphere
Visit site
I have 3 Kru XS gas auto lifejackets. They haven't been worn a lot. The auto firing part on all 3 has a replacement date of Feb 2012.
Does anyone have a recommendation re supplier for the rearm kits? Secondly, do I need to replace the gas cylinders as well as the auto firing mech?

Thank you
Graham
 
gdallas said:
I have 3 Kru XS gas auto lifejackets. They haven't been worn a lot. The auto firing part on all 3 has a replacement date of Feb 2012.
Does anyone have a recommendation re supplier for the rearm kits? Secondly, do I need to replace the gas cylinders as well as the auto firing mech?

Thank you
Graham
Click to expand...
Seems they use United Moulders (UM) the is a wery common firing system - shop around.

-The gas bottles have a gross weight stamped on the bottle, use a good digital weight to check the weight. If the bottle has lost gas (the weight is reduced by the net weight)
-Also check bottle for corrosion.
I both above is OK no need to replace the bottle.
 
KellysEye said:
To be safe I replace both the auto firing and the bottle.
Click to expand...

Never felt the need to replace a CO2 cylinder that shows no signs of corrosion, no visible damage and has the correct weight of CO2. Seems rather a waste of money.

I know that some people will say "what's my life worth etc.?". But if it isn't damaged and has the correct CO2 charge it will work properly. Just installing a new one without checking the weight means that the new cylinder is as suspect as the old one.
 
Mistroma said:
Never felt the need to replace a CO2 cylinder that shows no signs of corrosion, no visible damage and has the correct weight of CO2. Seems rather a waste of money.

I know that some people will say "what's my life worth etc.?". But if it isn't damaged and has the correct CO2 charge it will work properly. Just installing a new one without checking the weight means that the new cylinder is as suspect as the old one.
Click to expand...

True, but testing a lifejacket is SO much fun and if you are considering replacing the whole lot why not jump in some water?
 
And where the hell do you get a good digital scale that can accurately weigh 33g of co2 and spot the one that is empty. I've taken the view that a visual inspection of the bottle, test that the LJ holds gas, and that components are in date is fine.
 
Last edited:
nigelmercier said:
See http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00AAWX9QA/dolcetto-21 for less than the price of a cylinder.



Is this true of all Kru lifejackets? How do you know?
Click to expand...

Do you reckon these scales are any good Nigel? I followed your link to Amazon and looked to see what else they sold.

Weighs up to 100g, so should do a 30g cylinder and 0.01g accuracy seems ok - very cheap, so don't know about the quality.

I mess around with chemicals too, so I am after a decent set of scales.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/...act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A2YH15E911HC7Y

Tim
 
jac said:
And where the hell do you get a good digital scale that can accurately weigh 33g of co2 and spot the one that is empty. I've taken the view that a visual inspection of the bottle, test that the LJ holds gas, and that components are in date is fine.
Click to expand...
I use a digital kitchen scale.
When weighing the bottle it's always close - if the bottle had lost 33g (or more for larger bottles) It would have been evident.
 
nigelmercier said:
What if it had lost 2g? As soon as they lose any weight they should be discarded. I mark the weight every time I check them.
Click to expand...

I can't think of a scenario where you would only lose some of the CO2. If it is fired, the gas exits the cylinder PDQ (and there is a hole made in the top). If it is corroded sufficiently to give a tiny leak, it will a) empty very quickly anyway and b) look corroded, and should be replaced.

For what it is worth, I don't think weighing sealed cylinders has much value - I inspect to ensure there is no hole in the top, and discard any that are corroded. I suspect the practice comes from larger cylinders, with screw in fittings, which can develop slow leaks.
 
andrewbroadbent said:
I can't think of a scenario where you would only lose some of the CO2. If it is fired, the gas exits the cylinder PDQ (and there is a hole made in the top). If it is corroded sufficiently to give a tiny leak, it will a) empty very quickly anyway and b) look corroded, and should be replaced.
Click to expand...

And yet, when you do a lifejacket servicing course, the benchmark for cylinder replacement is a loss of 2g. If it has lost that or more, it's to be thrown away...so there must be a scenario, although it does, on first glance, appear unlikely....I suspect this comes from the tolerance stamped on the bottle : a cylinder containing 33g of Co2 usually weighs 138grams, the tolerance stamped on it is around the 136g mark IIRC.
 
Last edited:
FishyInverness said:
And yet, when you do a lifejacket servicing course, the benchmark is a loss of 2g. If it has lost that or more, it's to be thrown away...so there must be a scenario, although it does, on first glance, appear unlikely....
Click to expand...

Is that loss or acceptable manufactured weight though?

Whenever you manufacture anything there will be variance. I wonder if the 2g tolerance stems from the fact that a cylinder manufactured with 5g less weight would be discarded and therefore when servicing the same should apply. If you know that the cylinder will either be full or discharged then knowing whether it's got 33g or 30g is probably irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top