[nateo]

Is there a rule of thumb for bottle weight vs max CO2? Or I guess the weight to volume ratio to total carbonation volume?

I have some Boulevard bottles that weigh 256g and had beer with published CO2 of 3.5 volumes. I have some Piraat bottles that weigh 283g, and had a lot of carbonation, but I don't know how much. My plain old longnecks weigh about 200g, and those I assume are only safe up to 3 volumes.

[tschmidlin]

I'll bet there is a correlation, but we'd need to gather data, which means emptying a lot of bottles

[morticaixavier]

I'll bet there is a correlation, but we'd need to gather data, which means emptying a lot of bottles

and then blowing them up?

[tschmidlin]

Sure

[euge]

I've been carbonating my longnecks to 4 and 5 volumes without a single failure. Don't know about any ratio but my little Belgian 11.2's are hefty and hold more- much more.

I think bottles can hold pressure than is conventionally expected. This is a good question.

[tschmidlin]

I'm sure they are intentionally over engineered so they don't explode when they break.  I think that's the real danger, a bottle may have an unnoticed flaw that really weakens it or if you accidentally bang it on something and shards of glass go flying everywhere.

[euge]

I'd say that was my point Tom. They can't survive tile either!

[nateo]

I wonder how they're tested? Are CO2 volumes static tested, where they just pump them up until they explode? Or maybe they're impact tested? I dunno.

I know for a lot of bicycle tires they're just static tested, then the PSI at failure is divided in half to get the max operating pressure.

[morticaixavier]

I wonder how they're tested? Are CO2 volumes static tested, where they just pump them up until they explode? Or maybe they're impact tested? I dunno.

I know for a lot of bicycle tires they're just static tested, then the PSI at failure is divided in half to get the max operating pressure.

That's like how they get the weight limits for bridges right? they drive bigger and bigger trucks over them until they collapse and then rebuild and post the limit 

[ccfoo242]

I'll bet there is a correlation, but we'd need to gather data, which means emptying a lot of bottles

and then blowing them up?

Mythbusters style!

[Siamese Moose]

I would doubt you could do it by weight. Bottle quality varies a lot between suppliers. Take a look sometime at the bottles you've broken. Some are nicely symmetrical, with even wall thicknesses all the way around. Others are not, with big differences in wall thickness from one point to another. Those asymmetrical bottles weigh the same as the better ones, but clearly they won't have the same pressure capabilities. There are some breweries out there whose bottles I never reuse anymore.

[bo]

I wonder how they're tested? Are CO2 volumes static tested, where they just pump them up until they explode? Or maybe they're impact tested? I dunno.

I know for a lot of bicycle tires they're just static tested, then the PSI at failure is divided in half to get the max operating pressure.

When a bottle is recertified it's hydrostatically tested. The bottle is filled with water and placed in another container of water. The water level of the outside container is noted, The bottle is then hydraulically filled with more water to a certain pressure. The outer water level is noted again to reveal the expansion of the bottle. Too much and it's rejected. A rejected bottle, by law, has to be disabled, usually by cutting a hole in it.

Because they use water, if the bottle ruptures, nothing dramatic happens.

[morticaixavier]

I wonder how they're tested? Are CO2 volumes static tested, where they just pump them up until they explode? Or maybe they're impact tested? I dunno.

I know for a lot of bicycle tires they're just static tested, then the PSI at failure is divided in half to get the max operating pressure.

When a bottle is recertified it's hydrostatically tested. The bottle is filled with water and placed in another container of water. The water level of the outside container is noted, The bottle is then hydraulically filled with more water to a certain pressure. The outer water level is noted again to reveal the expansion of the bottle. Too much and it's rejected. A rejected bottle, by law, has to be disabled, usually by cutting a hole in it.

Because they use water, if the bottle ruptures, nothing dramatic happens.

Really? Every single 12 oz bottle that gets returned for reuse gets tested this way? that's crazy! and wouldn't tossing it in a bin to shatter be alot easier than cutting a hole in it?

[bo]

I wonder how they're tested? Are CO2 volumes static tested, where they just pump them up until they explode? Or maybe they're impact tested? I dunno.

I know for a lot of bicycle tires they're just static tested, then the PSI at failure is divided in half to get the max operating pressure.

When a bottle is recertified it's hydrostatically tested. The bottle is filled with water and placed in another container of water. The water level of the outside container is noted, The bottle is then hydraulically filled with more water to a certain pressure. The outer water level is noted again to reveal the expansion of the bottle. Too much and it's rejected. A rejected bottle, by law, has to be disabled, usually by cutting a hole in it.

Because they use water, if the bottle ruptures, nothing dramatic happens.

Really? Every single 12 oz bottle that gets returned for reuse gets tested this way? that's crazy! and wouldn't tossing it in a bin to shatter be alot easier than cutting a hole in it?

Oops, I thought we were discussing CO2 tanks. My bad.

[morticaixavier]

I wonder how they're tested? Are CO2 volumes static tested, where they just pump them up until they explode? Or maybe they're impact tested? I dunno.

I know for a lot of bicycle tires they're just static tested, then the PSI at failure is divided in half to get the max operating pressure.

When a bottle is recertified it's hydrostatically tested. The bottle is filled with water and placed in another container of water. The water level of the outside container is noted, The bottle is then hydraulically filled with more water to a certain pressure. The outer water level is noted again to reveal the expansion of the bottle. Too much and it's rejected. A rejected bottle, by law, has to be disabled, usually by cutting a hole in it.

Because they use water, if the bottle ruptures, nothing dramatic happens.

Really? Every single 12 oz bottle that gets returned for reuse gets tested this way? that's crazy! and wouldn't tossing it in a bin to shatter be alot easier than cutting a hole in it?

Oops, I thought we were discussing CO2 tanks. My bad.

ahh that makes more sense