Our friend should know. He knows everything and criticises everything.
HP Hose Failure
- Thread starter davehicks
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
- Status
Our friend should know. He knows everything and criticises everything.
Eric Sedletzky
Contributor
Heck Eric again I thought I did already. LOL
Look lets take your your old mate the US Divers Conshelf XIV Supreme they used Gates 1/4" Divers hose to the SAE 100 R3 specification before the Aqualung Group took over. I listed earlier I should know I supplied the Royal Navy with 1,000's of them and wrote the Manufacturing Inspection and Test Procedure for the thing. Every nut bolt screw washer seat pin hose mouthpiece box top box bottom silver solder spec chrome plating buff and polish service and repair even the ANSTI testing reports and the modifications made but never discussed regarding external placement of the first stage for on board oxygen make up for the diving Bells and modification of the regulator for (deleted) on the (. ) military closed circuit rebreather project together with material changes from plated CZ brass to a more oxygen compliant material together with the seat polymer compound.
But I don't sell you diddly Im not a shop or your go to internet retail supplier I do work in the diving industry business but not in recreational sports products but admit the lines are hazy in some areas just as modern non disclosure agreements preclude being able to list off all the projects and work.
Now I have made the assumption that as US Divers and (deleted) are no longer around Im free to make a very basic cut to the chase disclosure as requested reply. For starters you understand.
(and sorry for the deletion as the company in question they were taken over )I did however supply the Royal Navy with 2000 pairs at a time of non magnetic jet fins that's 4000 blades and a whole bundle of ni bronze round bar. and a non mag depth gauge that didn't lower your child production potential. Its the nearest I can do to scuba gear at the moment and trust it gives me some credit in this recreational scuba diving world.
Eric as stated earlier EN250 or DEMA 250 is an inferior standard to that of the earlier models that used the industrial SAE100R3 standard
Its not only inferior but you need to understand that scuba gear is a recreational sports product now and not military of commercial or in any way near to what used to be hawked and termed "Life Support Equipment" mostly imported from the likes of China and Taiwan with your American manufacturers now pretty much closed and gone.
Now ask yourself what the folk at DEMA know about divers hose or the retail salesmen for the various brands or even the big hose supplies from Italy Taiwan or China But as a committee DEMA et al get to make the rules they have the power to create the standard however poor or inferior while you the user have neither the power to stop them or the information or knowledge to contest.
Further it say EN250 because it has to this is the new standard rules for recreational scuba hose.
The penalty for using this made purely for profit inferior standard hose is that also slipped in is the requirement to replace the hose by your local scuba shop due to its short life expectancy on your dime.
Look again at your Us Divers Conshelf XIV how long did the hoses last how often were you required to service when was spares kits banned from end users and ask yourself who benefits. Just saying.
All again when compared to the absolute stand alone professional standard of SAE
Someone please tell me if I am wrong. I understood that European standards (EN250 being one) was to facilitate trade within the EU. It is as far as I know a minimum standard
Eric Sedletzky
Contributor
Ok, so buying hoses that say "Made in USA" and also have "EN250" marked on the same hose are junk? Because I have several that have both on the same hose.
So we can't go by "made in USA" anymore I take it?
I'm just trying to understand what needs to be marked on the hose so I know it's not junk.
I looked at all my hoses, and none of them have SAE100R3 on them.
If I call somewhere and ask if their LP and HP hoses are up to SAE100R3 standards are they going to know what I'm talking about?
Just tell us!
...and please stop with the long talk and the irrelevant list of credentials, I'm sure you're very qualified and know a lot about the industry inside and out. That's great but I don't care, I just want to know about hoses and what I need to look for that's STAMPED ON THE HOSE.
So we can't go by "made in USA" anymore I take it?
I'm just trying to understand what needs to be marked on the hose so I know it's not junk.
I looked at all my hoses, and none of them have SAE100R3 on them.
If I call somewhere and ask if their LP and HP hoses are up to SAE100R3 standards are they going to know what I'm talking about?
Just tell us!
...and please stop with the long talk and the irrelevant list of credentials, I'm sure you're very qualified and know a lot about the industry inside and out. That's great but I don't care, I just want to know about hoses and what I need to look for that's STAMPED ON THE HOSE.
No your absolutely correct good point a minimum standard.
EN250 states regarding the intermediate and HP hose this simplistic requirement:
"A hose can also be marked with the maximum working pressure of that particular
type of hose, EN250 and can also include a serial number specific to that hose".
That allowed the toilet hose company Miflex in Italy to produce on mass together with China Taiwan et al
the overpriced made for profit junk to minimum standards.
Now compare the same 150 psi hose maximum working pressure with that of the older SAE standard that although working at the same 150psi pressure the old specification had a maximum allowable working pressure of 1250 psi together with a burst pressure of 5000 psi. This gives a safety margin of 4:1 Four time the maximum allowable working pressure before burst. More than the full working pressure of the cylinder.
This principle was applied and incorporated into a design some years ago that I was involved in for a Helicopter Emergency Escape Device a HEED system. We produced a design that used no user or manufacturing adjustment in either the first or the second stage and at the same internal parts were identical for both the demand valve and the pressure regulator using two identical pressure modules.
The design was tested at the ANSTI test centre and passed to 30msw 100 FSW as required with a reduced interstage pressure of 4 bar 58 psi rather than the normal 150 psi. The intermediate hose was a micropore high pressure hose that in the event of a 1st stage failure the second stage would be able to control the bottle pressure and still operate during an egress. The size of the cylinder was however too small to sustain life for long at the 100FSW test depth but the principle of design was proven to work at the required average 12 foot depth, the assumed emergency egress condition.
Now EN250 the latest European adopted standard killed that particular and unique design dead.
- Status
Similar threads
