300 bar to 200 bar DIN adaptor?

[Peter69_56]

I assume you have tried new O rings and such. Looking at the theory of how it seals there should be no way it cannot, unless as you say the thread has an issue. And yes I would not play with recutting the threads. If they are cut incorrectly, the reg could become a missile at 200 BAR.

Is the head piece not parallel perhaps? Thus adding an extra O ring allows more tolerance for this?

Are you sure its not the tank thread? Perhaps a fault there or have you tried a number of tanks?

 

[NotSure]

Turns out I'm am not trying to connect a 232 BAR regulator DIN (male) to a 300 BAR DIN tank (female). All of my 4 DIN regulators have 7 thread "300 BAR DIN" connectors.

I'm not sure that just having 7 threads makes a DIN connector 300 BAR. The link AWAP posted says that it is the center nut/post that differentiates 232 and 300 BAR. I don't have a 300 BAR valve or a 232 BAR DIN connector around, but I measured 200 BAR and 300 BAR connectors (see photos). I see no reason a 232 BAR DIN connector couldn't have 7 threads and still not work because the 300 bar tank valve has a smaller hole in the O-ring mating surface. If all 4 of your connector have 7 threads, check and see if the center nuts are the same diameter.

 

[Tigerman]

300 bar, in addition to having longer threads (7 vs 5) also has a deeper seating - the end piece thats not threaded goes farther on 300 bar than on 200 (232) bar

 

[raftingtigger]

My receipts say they are all 300 BAR conversion kits. All of them have the same diameter center protrusion and all sit neatly into the depression inside the valve.

For AWAP, spacer part #35 goes under the saddle and sits outside of the tank valve and inside the regulator. The listed link to LeisurePro for the SP universal DIN kit looks just like mine except the wheel has a slightly different grip pattern on the one in my picture. The 2 pictures show opposite ends of the central fitting. The LeisurePro pic showes the part inserted into the regulator, my pic shows the valve end.

All the regulators with their current o-rings work great on all my 6 other tanks so I don't think it is an o-ring issue.

 

[NotSure]

I think that Tigerman is right that the issue is the depth of the end piece and not the diameter of the center nut. Assuming your tank valve is the old Sherwood 300 BAR type, I checked a Scubapro universal connector and an old Sherwood type and there is a small difference. I don't know if 0.02 " is enough to cause your problem but there is some variation in connectors by brand so maybe 300 bar valves vary slightly also. I do know that some 200 BAR DIN connectors will fit on some 3442 psi valves and not on others.

 

[raftingtigger]

I think that Tigerman is right that the issue is the depth of the end piece and not the diameter of the center nut. Assuming your tank valve is the old Sherwood 300 BAR type, I checked a Scubapro universal connector and an old Sherwood type and there is a small difference. I don't know if 0.02 " is enough to cause your problem but there is some variation in connectors by brand so maybe 300 bar valves vary slightly also. I do know that some 200 BAR DIN connectors will fit on some 3442 psi valves and not on others.

View attachment 197899View attachment 197900View attachment 197901

If by end piece you mean the right 2 pictures and the part being measured - absolutely agree. My putting an o-ring in between the end piece and the threaded DIN wheel as a (temporary) spacer supports this.

At least in my case it is clearly not the diameter of the center protrusion.

 

[Peter69_56]

I'm not sure that just having 7 threads makes a DIN connector 300 BAR. The link AWAP posted says that it is the center nut/post that differentiates 232 and 300 BAR. I don't have a 300 BAR valve or a 232 BAR DIN connector around, but I measured 200 BAR and 300 BAR connectors (see photos). I see no reason a 232 BAR DIN connector couldn't have 7 threads and still not work because the 300 bar tank valve has a smaller hole in the O-ring mating surface. If all 4 of your connector have 7 threads, check and see if the center nuts are the same diameter.

View attachment 197894View attachment 197895

My understanding of the difference between a 300 BAR and 232 BAR DIN reg fitting is;

300 BAR has 7 threads rather than 5
300 BAR has a smaller end tube than a 232 BAR so even if you managed to get the 232 BAR into a 300 BAR valve all the way, it wont enter the end of the valve which is drilled out as its too narrow.
300 BAR DIN fitting has a thicker end piece (not threaded) that seats the O ring.

That all being said, a 300 BAR should fit any 232 BAR valve but not the other way around.

I agree, perhaps you have been sent an incorrect DIN fitting, a mix of 232 body and 300 threaded section although one would think they wouldn't mate together. I would measure all of them and compare every bit to rule that out. Then I would swap components after marking them and see if the fault remains with the body or transfers with the nut. If you can tie down where the actual issue is, then you might finally resolve it. Also check depth of the O ring groove on each. Don't assume anything, measure everything and put it onto an excel spread sheet to compare. Mark them 1-4 and then you can play with the bits. That's how I would resolve it anyway. As an afterthought check the depth of all of the reg end tubes as one a bit longer will hit the end of the valve (bit that is deepest in the valve)

 

[NotSure]

If by end piece you mean the right 2 pictures and the part being measured - absolutely agree. My putting an o-ring in between the end piece and the threaded DIN wheel as a (temporary) spacer supports this.

At least in my case it is clearly not the diameter of the center protrusion.

It looks like you have found the problem and a good safe solution. If you find a source for a copper or brass washer that works you might want to post the source. Looks like 11/16" for the inside diameter for Scubapro and whatever will work on your valve for the outside.

 

[halocline]

This link will show the difference. DIN Scuba Fittings

The first pic below is a proper 300 BAR fill whip which will only fit a 300 BAR valve as the head pin is too long for a 232 BAR valve (and yes they are a pain) which prevents using a 300BAR compressor on a 232 BAR tank. The second picture is a 300 BAR DIN regulator which will fit a 300 BAR valve or a 232 BAR valve.

I know all about the difference between the 200 and 300 bar DIN fittings, but thank you!

Here's the interesting thing about the fill whip that you shared; it only has 5 threads, and it is apparently set up up so that only 2 of those threads actually catch, on the deeper 300 bar valve, and no threads on the 200 bar. Correct?

This means that by design, 2 threads are apparently sufficient to hold 300 bar of pressure. This pretty much negates any ideas that the extra threads in the 300 bar design are there to withstand the higher pressure.

 

[NotSure]

I think the 300 BAR DIN connector is just a sales gimmick now unless you happen to have an old 300 BAR valve. I don't know why anyone would want 7 threads when 5 is overkill already. It just makes the regulator stick out farther from the valve for no good reason. I would use all 200 BAR connectors if I could find ones that would work on all of my regulators and valves.