DIN, Yoke, or both? What would you do?

[crab lover]

What they said... convert reg to DIN and get a yoke adapter. I love it!

 

[Grognard]

DIN is the way to go for for a new rig. The yoke adapters are easy to use.

The dive operators in this area are starting to use H valves on their rental tanks, one outlet for DIN and the other with an adapter for yoke. That way there is never any problem.

 

[Richesb]

Din is so far superior to yoke it shouldn't be a consideration.
As others have said; Get a yoke adapter for when needed. That shouldn't be often if you plan ahead. When we go other places we call ahead and ask for din tanks. Has not been a problem, here or out of the USA.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

I like DIN and switched several years ago - but it is not as wonderful as it seems nor are yoke valves that bad. (ie: "DIN is far superior to yoke", is overstating the case and does not really do anything other than create a misplaced sense of valve envy.)

DIN valves potentially trap more water and more care is needed in filling to ensure the valve is dry inside to prevent water getting blown into the tank. The longer 300 bar DIN valves are in my opinion more susceptible to damage due to the longer and not all that well supported female end of the connection. I went from using "stronger" 300 bar valves initially to using less damage prone and equally strong 200/232 bar valves exclusively.

In terms of strenght, I have never had a problem with 232 bar valves after the dive shop's generous 3600-3700 psi fills in my 3442 psi tanks. The extra 58 psi difference between a 3442 psi E series tank and a true 3500 psi HP series tank is not significant and in my opinon drawing the line at 3442 psi versus 3500 psi is both arbitrary and stupid given that there are many 3442 psi tanks and many 3500 psi tanks and then nothing else until you reach tanks in the 4000-5000 psi range that are frankly not commonly used anyway.

None of this is surprising as the difference between 200 and 300 bar valves was prompted not to prevent the higher pressure from blowing up the "weaker" 200/232 bar valve, but rather to prevent the connection of lower service pressure regs to a tank with more pressure than the reg was designed to handle. Realistically this now only applies to tanks well over 3500 psi where a true 300 bar/4350 psi reg would be required. Just about every other reg currently produced is just as happy at 3500 psi as it is at 3300 psi. Similarly, the 5 threads of the 200/232 bar valve are not any less secure than the 7 threads of the 300 bar valve and are more than strong enough for a 3500 psi tank. The difference is again lenght not strenght.

Consequently, if I owned a 3500 psi tank it would have a 232 bar valve on it.

Yoke valves are often bashed as the o-ring is "less secure". That accusation is false as with a properly fitting yoke connection there is, just like a DIN valve, metal to metal contact around the o-ring that ensures that none of the o-ring can extrude. However if the yoke is not tight, or if it is a very old 2250 psi yoke, there is the potential to create enough space through either the lose connection or yoke stretch to allow an o-ring to extrude - but it is operator error, not a design deficiency of the yoke valve that causes this. Since the o-ring sits in the valve, it is more prone to being dislodged if the operator does something stupid during the connection process. A DIN valve in contrast will leak if loosely connected but the o-ring will not dislodge so it does have a small advantage. But unless a diver is stupid or careless, yoke valves are not going to be a problem.

In their defense, I have never had a yoke valve screw itself loose on an unpressurized tank during a dive while I have had that happen on a DIN valve and that is something I had to learn to check prior to pressurizing deco bottles after I switched to DIN. Yoke valves are also more common in many travel destinations where consequently a DID reg can be a pain. I have a DIN/yoke adapter but I am not a big fan as they add nearly an inch to the distance the reg sticks out from the valve and they consequently tend to poke you in the back of the head as well as add an extra o-ring to potentially fail.

So does that add up to "DIN valves are far superior"? Not really.

If you have a reason to go the DIN route (technical diving), do it. Otherwise, there is not all that much benefit to DIN versus yoke for a recreational diver - and it is probably a net loss for the traveling diver. If that is the case, then the money spent converting 3 regs to DIN will be a lot more than the money you save on 4 HP tanks unless the price is very, very good. (And it is a moot point anyway if you cannot get a 3500 psi fill from your LDS.)

 

[dl348]

All of our regs are DIN now and I would recommend going that way. I just feel that it's a more secure connection than a yoke is. Our tank valves are all convertible so it was easy to just take out the insert to convert them from yoke to DIN. We purchased our regs as yoke initially, but then bought the DIN conversion kit and changed them over. They stay that way when we dive locally but I swap them back to yoke when we go on vacation, it takes less than 5 minutes.
Good luck with your decision.

 

[amajamar]

Thanks for the replies!

It seems that all the responses are pro-DIN, which I can understand, seeing that all the responders are using DIN connections. However, my question was more towards the "should I or shouldn't I", convert for the sake of purchasing DIN only tanks.

DA Aquamaster has given the most objective response based on my original question and I thank you for that. If I am correct in interpreting your response, what you are telling me is that dollar for dollar I may be better off with buying the 3442 psi tanks with the convertible DIN/yoke valve and keeping my current regs yoke. That to me seems like it solves a multitude of problems including sharing my tanks with someone without a DIN reg. I am not adverse to my yoke regs, (considering they are all I have!) and spending the $160 to convert them could go to the cost of the tanks.

Now, my next question is what size tank to buy! (My next new post!)

Thanks to all!

 

[Colliam7]

ISo, would you buy the tanks and convert the regs or would you look around for a really good price for the (HP 3442 psi) convertable valve tanks and leave the regs alone?

The best answer is that it depends on the cost of converting the regs. If they can't be converted, or would cost $100+ each, it may be best to get newer 3442 tanks with Pro valves, and convert your regs, or buy new ones, over time. Part of the answer depends on how good the deal on the tanks might be. If you can get some 3500 (DIN only) PSI tanks, with current hydro / VIP, in great shape, for a 'song' do it. (However, you mention the price is good, not great, so that may rule this approach out.) If not, look for somewhat more expensive, but adaptible, 3442 tanks with Pro valves and keep your regs yoke for the time being. Having said that, I have evolved to all DIN. I have only one tank with a Pro valve, and couldn't even say where the yoke insert is at the moment.

What are the pros and cons of each setup?

If you have your own tanks, and don't / seldom rent or travel, there are few disadvantages, if any, to DIN and a lot of advantages. It is simply more secure than yoke, less risk of blown O-rings, etc. That doesn't mean they are perfect, as D_A points out. The O-ring is part of the (male) reg - not the tank - and will at times comes off the reg, and get lost, and you are sitting there on the boat with a reg and a tank, and the need for an O-ring. When I have to rent yoke tanks, I use a DIN to yoke adapter for my reg, that I carry in my bag. The one downside of that is I find the adapter moves the first stage forward enough to periodically cause me to bang my head on it. Not a showstopper by any means.

 

[Luis H]

I like DIN and switched several years ago - but it is not as wonderful as it seems nor are yoke valves that bad. (ie: "DIN is far superior to yoke", is overstating the case and does not really do anything other than create a misplaced sense of valve envy.)

DIN valves potentially trap more water and more care is needed in filling to ensure the valve is dry inside to prevent water getting blown into the tank. The longer 300 bar DIN valves are in my opinion more susceptible to damage due to the longer and not all that well supported female end of the connection. I went from using "stronger" 300 bar valves initially to using less damage prone and equally strong 200/232 bar valves exclusively.

In terms of strenght, I have never had a problem with 232 bar valves after the dive shop's generous 3600-3700 psi fills in my 3442 psi tanks. The extra 58 psi difference between a 3442 psi E series tank and a true 3500 psi HP series tank is not significant and in my opinon drawing the line at 3442 psi versus 3500 psi is both arbitrary and stupid given that there are many 3442 psi tanks and many 3500 psi tanks and then nothing else until you reach tanks in the 4000-5000 psi range that are frankly not commonly used anyway.

None of this is surprising as the difference between 200 and 300 bar valves was prompted not to prevent the higher pressure from blowing up the "weaker" 200/232 bar valve, but rather to prevent the connection of lower service pressure regs to a tank with more pressure than the reg was designed to handle. Realistically this now only applies to tanks well over 3500 psi where a true 300 bar/4350 psi reg would be required. Just about every other reg currently produced is just as happy at 3500 psi as it is at 3300 psi. Similarly, the 5 threads of the 200/232 bar valve are not any less secure than the 7 threads of the 300 bar valve and are more than strong enough for a 3500 psi tank. The difference is again lenght not strenght.

Consequently, if I owned a 3500 psi tank it would have a 232 bar valve on it.

Yoke valves are often bashed as the o-ring is "less secure". That accusation is false as with a properly fitting yoke connection there is, just like a DIN valve, metal to metal contact around the o-ring that ensures that none of the o-ring can extrude. However if the yoke is not tight, or if it is a very old 2250 psi yoke, there is the potential to create enough space through either the lose connection or yoke stretch to allow an o-ring to extrude - but it is operator error, not a design deficiency of the yoke valve that causes this. Since the o-ring sits in the valve, it is more prone to being dislodged if the operator does something stupid during the connection process. A DIN valve in contrast will leak if loosely connected but the o-ring will not dislodge so it does have a small advantage. But unless a diver is stupid or careless, yoke valves are not going to be a problem.

In their defense, I have never had a yoke valve screw itself loose on an unpressurized tank during a dive while I have had that happen on a DIN valve and that is something I had to learn to check prior to pressurizing deco bottles after I switched to DIN. Yoke valves are also more common in many travel destinations where consequently a DID reg can be a pain. I have a DIN/yoke adapter but I am not a big fan as they add nearly an inch to the distance the reg sticks out from the valve and they consequently tend to poke you in the back of the head as well as add an extra o-ring to potentially fail.

So does that add up to "DIN valves are far superior"? Not really.

If you have a reason to go the DIN route (technical diving), do it. Otherwise, there is not all that much benefit to DIN versus yoke for a recreational diver - and it is probably a net loss for the traveling diver. If that is the case, then the money spent converting 3 regs to DIN will be a lot more than the money you save on 4 HP tanks unless the price is very, very good. (And it is a moot point anyway if you cannot get a 3500 psi fill from your LDS.)

Thanks DA Aqua Master that is a great post.

The only thing I would add is that I would always avoid connecting my DIN regulator on a rental DIN tank (unless it is fairly new gear from a reputable perhaps tech shop). You can’t inspect the back side (pressure loaded side) of the threads. If the chrome is damaged (and it will happen) it will scratch the threads in your gear.

I also always use to use my own DIN to yoke adapter at the fill stations. I didn’t want to thread some else’s fill whip into my valves. They don’t always look that good either.



DIN or Yoke debate aside, I personally dislike the narrower tank neck in the 3500 psi tanks. I am glad they don’t make those anymore. IMHO they were a bad idea.

The narrow neck is that much harder to inspect and clean the inside of a tank.
Most end users may not care since they think it will cost the same for service, but human nature tells me that a service tech is going to be more willing to condemn a tank that is a pain in the rear to tumble than one that is easier to inspect and clean. It is much easier to do a good job cleaning and inspecting a tank with a larger neck opening.

I do my own tank (and regulator) service and would never own a 7/8” UNF neck tank (unless it was given to me). The standard 3/4” straight pipe thread neck has threads that actually larger than one inch.

In the future it may also be difficult to find replacement valves for the 7/8” UNF neck (just like it is hard to find 1/2” NPT valves now a day).

Here is a great link to a good description of tank valve neck sizes and DIN information:
Valves, Regulator Fittings, Cylinder Neck Openings -- More than you wanted to know



Oh…I used to use mostly DIN in the late 70’s, I don’t anymore. At this point I am mostly using yoke connections. I like them just as well or better…they are easier to keep a dry connection.

 

[Nemrod]

I have two DIN tanks and the appropriate DIN adapters for two Mk V seconds and for my Titan and Legend. However, I much prefer Yoke valves and connectors for general diving use. The DIN are prone to being damaged (warped or damaged threads or face), trap water, rental units often damage your regulator threads and sealing face, DIN can leak (usually from damage or FOD), more maintenence intensive and all of the switching back and forth.

This is sort of a "techie wannabe" issue with this DIN stuff, they are the prefered valve for overhead because I do agree they are a tad more secure and more important the yoke knob is not there to tangle lines on. In all other ways the yoke is more than adequate for general diving up to 3500 psi service. Many people, including the North American tech community, seem to prefer the low pressure tanks even with DIN. Low pressure and multi pressure steel tanks are their tank of choice in most cases and they are easier on equipment and easier to get a full fill or an overfill (as is often the need).

The only times I have seen yoke valves fail was on rental equipmet or damaged equipment. Shop monkeys like to place a big monkey wrench across the face to remove and install the valve which deforms the valve and face which ruins the metal to metal seal and allows an opportunity for the O ringto extriude. DIN valves can be simiarly damaged but once damaged either will not allow threading or will not seal at all. Some times a Yoke valve wil seal up if distored only to extrude an O ring when the yoke is bumped--hard. So-

3,500 tanks and up--DIN

cave/ overhead diving with lines/tangle possibilities (breaking a line in a cave--bad)--DIN

General scuba diving, LP tanks, travel--Yoke

"Techie look"---DIN

DIN valves generally seem to either seal or not whereas a damaged yoke valve may have an unstable seal so that is a safety concern for overhead diving. I am probably not wording this well but that is what I have observed.

N

 

[Eris Lucan7*]

I use DIN only but you need a fielwinding that makes it more esay,(DIN is not

realtet to the standart out off the Europan conferderation there is no regress

abel on Ganarty or plolicy by health or else damages out off the Eurpean

conferdation when those states are not under the supervision off the Eurpean

certification Agency (EC as CE) in Bruessel central western Europ)./Great Briton is not

member only in the Eurpean Union/

E.L.7*