[diveinfo] [matfcald@attglobal.net: RE: O2 handeling & procedures]

[Jean-Sebastien Morisset]

----- Forwarded message from "matthew f.caldwell" <matfcald@attglobal.net> -----

Delivered-To: jsmoriss@localhost.mvlan.net
Delivered-To: jsmoriss@mvlan.net
Delivered-To: mailing list quest@gue.com
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 23:00:16 +0800
From: "matthew f.caldwell" <matfcald@attglobal.net>
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353
To: "'Ken Paramore'" <kennyp56@centurytel.net>,
	"'Quest e-mail list'" <quest@gue.com>, <anbope@ruc.dk>
Subject: RE: O2 handeling & procedures 
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:quest-unsubscribe@gue.com>
thread-index: AcX7s6ESAFbK8z1GSBqRmf4pO/USWgAQpr7w
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mydestiny.net
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,MY_OBFUT,MY_OBFUX,
	MY_OBFUZ autolearn=no version=2.63

Hi,
What is unique about the dive industry is how it takes exception to what are
well established industry and military standards. ie, the 40% myth is an
invention, not a standard. While most people can relate to degrees of risk,
such as filling cylinders with an 80% oxygen mixture carries more risk than
a 36% enriched air fill.. The industry standard is that for any O2 level
greater than 23.5% ( the upper spec on air ) the equipment should be cleaned
as if it were going to be exposed to 100% O2. Obviously this is conservative
when, say, you are using 32% but less so the closer you get to 100%. 

What is ludicrous is the belief and practice that you are " safe " at 39.9%
or below and " not safe " at 40.0% and above..  This is also why we hear of
the occasional oil lubricated air compressor self destructing when someone
tries to use it for continuous blending of nitrox..  " But I was told it's
OK if < 40% " is the common lament.. you will even hear that < 40% is OK at
trade shows such as ADEX..
 I actually know someone who did blow up his compressor this way.. He
neglected the part in his gas blending manual that is quite specific about
the type of compressor that must be used for this purpose.. and a Bauer
Junior II was not on that list.. 

Who else recognizes this? Try www.luxfercylinders.com or
www.catalinacylinders.com  or the US Navy dive manual which uses 25% as an
upper limit for EAN not requiring O2 clean equipment. Also, almost every US
government agency likewise recognizes this upper limit. 

You will also note that there is only one dive certification agency
recognized by both these companies who " gets it right " when it comes to O2
cleaning.. ANDI. This is the corporate position of both Luxfer and Catalina.
It's right on the links above so please check it out.

Also note that below there is an error in the ANDI standard mentioned at the
bottom of this post. ANDI has no problem with the use of 100% O2 whether
filling cylinders or breathing it.

However unlike what almost everyone I know or have known who uses 100% O2,
ANDI does not conflict with the manufacturer when it comes to the hardware
and equipment used. They specify that equipment that handles O2 be O2 clean,
use O2 compatible materials and be engineered for oxygen service..   The
last requirement is where most of us fail in our application.. Our cylinders
are fine for 100% O2 ( again see the above links ). It's the valves and
regulators that may not be. 

Ever notice the difference between a CGA 870 valve on a medical O2 cylinder
vs a Thermo or Sherwood K valve? The later valves are specifically not
engineered for O2 service but we commonly use them for this purpose anyway.
Check out the design of these valves. They are very different. 

To a purist, the use of 100% O2 during deco is fine as long as it's supplied
from a cylinder with a CGA 870 or a CGA 540 valve on it.. In practice this
would mean surface supplied O2 or mounting modifications to a typical first
stage of a regulator.. Which of course is not always convenient so we bend
the rules somewhat, use a standard cylinder with K valve and unless you are
pressurizing a titanium first stage we get away with it with minimal risk.
BTW, Monel first stages exist for the purist but brass seems to be
compatible enough for most of us.. 

As for cleaning, again, ANDI uses only cleaners recognized and approved for
O2 cleaning..  Joy dishwashing detergent is out.. so is Simple Green btw and
that is the position of the manufacturer of Simple Green not ANDI.. On the
other hand, one cleaner called Blue Gold is approved by the DOT as
acceptable for O2 cleaning. This cleaner is environmentally benign and a
little goes a long way.. It can also be filtered up to a point for re-use.
The US military uses other cleaners such as NOC ( Naval Oxygen Cleaner
)which is less convenient to use than Blue Gold and harder to find.

To look at it another way, ANDI is to gas blending and O2 cleaning as GUE is
to diving.. Both look at these respective areas as purists. I don't think
anyone on this list will argue about the merits of the DIR philosophy. 

Likewise the ANDI approach is the purists way to prepare equipment for O2
use that is unique in the dive industry and is the only agency that is
consistent with industry and the military. 

If you don't want to use the methods taught by ANDI it's your call of
course. Just remember that if you say ANDI is excessive or calls for
procedures that are unnecessary.. you are also saying the exact same thing
for the compressed gas industry and US military as well..   Ed Betts did
some really pioneering work in this area about 15 years ago so if anyone is
interested, you don't have to reinvent the wheel.. it was all worked out
long ago.

matt

( ps yes, I am an ANDI instructor )

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Paramore [mailto:kennyp56@centurytel.net] 
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 12:53 PM
To: Quest e-mail list; anbope@ruc.dk
Subject: Fw: O2 handeling & procedures 

>From my files.
Bless,
Kenny P.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jarrod Jablonski" <JJ@halcyon.net>
To: "Shlomi Palnitsky" <palnizky@internet-zahav.net>; "Jarrod Jablonski" 
<JJ@gue.com>; "dir quest" <quest@gue.com>; "Trey" <trey@netdor.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: O2 hendeling & procedures


> This one will never die and the liability and long shot risk makes it 
> tough
> for anyone not to back cleaning. The problem really relates more to what 
> is
> "clean"?
>
> 6.2 Special Preparations for Elevated Oxygen Concentrations
> . . . . .  .
>  . . . . . .
>      In the end, the debate over oxygen cleaning is less a disagreement
> over whether equipment should be clean; rather it is a debate over
> inconsistency and the erroneous application of existing guidelines.  For
> example, equipment that is "oxygen clean" is no longer "oxygen clean" when
> filled with air that is not classified as oxygen compatible. In practice,
> few divers follow this guideline; meaning that for them to conform to the
> existing guidelines, after each such fill their equipment would have to be
> "oxygen cleaned".  Divers should seek facilities that fill tanks with
> oxygen compatible air or air of similar quality.
>
> 6.3 Oxygen Cleaning
>      What people understand by "oxygen cleaning" varies greatly. In the
> diving world, the term "oxygen cleaning" is well known, nonetheless, 
> divers
> differ greatly with respect to what this means exactly or how to 
> accomplish
> it.  At its most extreme, it is individuals in special outfits cleaning in
> "clean rooms"; at its other it is individuals "cleaning" in filthy
> condition surrounded by an array of contaminants. In any case, it is 
> likely
> that a sensible approach toward oxygen cleaning will reap the greatest
> rewards, and that attention to it will provide acceptable results.
>      While the consensus in the SCUBA industry is that oxygen cleaning
> below 40% is not necessary, nonetheless, many divers find it more 
> practical
> to establish uniform cleaning guidelines for all their equipment.  Rather
> than dedicate a specific regulator to a specific function, most divers
> maintain equipment equally and use it interchangeably. Therefore, should 
> an
> equipment failure cause one component to be moved into oxygen service, the
> diver need not be concerned about varying cleaning parameters.  . . . .
>
> At 01:28 AM 7/15/2001 +0200, Shlomi Palnitsky wrote:
>>Hi
>>An ANDI instrector told me about ANDI standard for O2 handling . tank and
>>reg must be serviced for O2 use from 23% O2 and no filling / diving 100% 
>>O2 .
>>what is the GUE & WKPP protocol for O2 hendeling & procedures  ?.
>>
>>Shlomi
>>ISRAEL
>>
>
> Jarrod Jablonski
>
> CEO- Halcyon Manufacturing
> President- Global Underwater Explorers
>
> Halcyon Manufacturing www.halcyon.net
> Halcyon manufacturing produces some of the scuba industry's most novel and
> robust diving equipment designed by many of diving's most active 
> explorers.
> From the world record Halcyon rebreather to revolutionary lighting and
> life support equipment our companies are revolutionizing the manufacturing
> of aquatic equipment.
>
> Global Underwater Explorers www.gue.com
> Global Underwater Explorers is a non-profit educational, research, and
> exploratory organization. GUE regularly engages in international
> expeditions and has hundreds of dedicated members around the world. From
> entry level technical diver training to advanced exploratory, research and
> filming projects GUE is widely considered one of the world's most diverse
> and capable aquatic organizations.
> 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: quest-unsubscribe@gue.com
For additional commands, e-mail: quest-help@gue.com



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: quest-unsubscribe@gue.com
For additional commands, e-mail: quest-help@gue.com


----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Jean-Sebastien Morisset, Sr. UNIX Administrator <jsmoriss@mvlan.net>
Personal Home Page <http://jsmoriss.mvlan.net/>
Underwater and Travel Photographs <http://www.mvpix.com/>