"Going to a higher duro o-ring and a little extra torque might stop it from extruding"
Great point and good understanding of what the failure was.
But before throwing away your regulator, consider the following (pardon the engineering/geek talk in this):
1. AWAP is absolutely correct - this should not have happened. I don't know the margin or error involved in the design specfication, but it would at least be 30% higher than the stated value.
2. The o-ring, as AWAP pointed out, was extruded (is this a common word in the dive industry?) through the little tiny openning. But why is not that easy to determine.
3. The following are likely causes:
a. The design of the seat/compression area is faulty, either by design or by wear (actually fairly unlikely in this case, but it could be)
b. The O-ring was slightly smaller than the design specification. Smaller could be the diameter of the ring (inside or outside), or the diameter of the material.
c. The O-ring was slightly bigger than the design specification. Blah, Blah.... as above.
d. The durometer of the material was too soft. Actually, there are 5 or 6 common measurements of material hardness, but this is one of the most common. Hardness is always a trade-off between it and flexibility/compressability. This is actually a very common issues with high pressure static O-rings.
e. The O-ring is not made with the correct material. With a given material, hardness and flexibility are clear opposites. Change materials and all bets are off. I would bet I can get at least 50 different types of "rubber" looking material in an O-ring.
Because this started with you getting service done, my bet is on the o-ring. That it happened twice is actually a good sign (in a strange, twisted sort of way), because it means that the o-rings were replaced. The only problem is that they (the o-rings) don't seem to be quite up to the job.
If it were me, I would just test the o-rings for fit and hardness. But if you don't have a micrometer and a hand held durometer, I would suggest getting some O-rings from a different source, and try those.
As a note, in my business, every o-ring has a size, allowable tolerances, material and hardness specifications. I have never seen this in the dive equipmentment world. Doesn't mean they don't have it, just never seen it.
By the way, using a slightly harder, better material O-ring is always a good idea with this type of design.
I did a quick check and getting a 70 duro Buta-N o-ring (lowest cost) versus a 75 duro viton (fluorocarbon) increases the cost per o-ring by 5 times - from 2 cents to 10 cents. A lot if one is making thousands, but hardly anything to an individual.
Also, Viton is FDA approved and has an almost infinite life span when setting around, which is not true with Buta-N (except the FDA part).
Great point and good understanding of what the failure was.
But before throwing away your regulator, consider the following (pardon the engineering/geek talk in this):
1. AWAP is absolutely correct - this should not have happened. I don't know the margin or error involved in the design specfication, but it would at least be 30% higher than the stated value.
2. The o-ring, as AWAP pointed out, was extruded (is this a common word in the dive industry?) through the little tiny openning. But why is not that easy to determine.
3. The following are likely causes:
a. The design of the seat/compression area is faulty, either by design or by wear (actually fairly unlikely in this case, but it could be)
b. The O-ring was slightly smaller than the design specification. Smaller could be the diameter of the ring (inside or outside), or the diameter of the material.
c. The O-ring was slightly bigger than the design specification. Blah, Blah.... as above.
d. The durometer of the material was too soft. Actually, there are 5 or 6 common measurements of material hardness, but this is one of the most common. Hardness is always a trade-off between it and flexibility/compressability. This is actually a very common issues with high pressure static O-rings.
e. The O-ring is not made with the correct material. With a given material, hardness and flexibility are clear opposites. Change materials and all bets are off. I would bet I can get at least 50 different types of "rubber" looking material in an O-ring.
Because this started with you getting service done, my bet is on the o-ring. That it happened twice is actually a good sign (in a strange, twisted sort of way), because it means that the o-rings were replaced. The only problem is that they (the o-rings) don't seem to be quite up to the job.
If it were me, I would just test the o-rings for fit and hardness. But if you don't have a micrometer and a hand held durometer, I would suggest getting some O-rings from a different source, and try those.
As a note, in my business, every o-ring has a size, allowable tolerances, material and hardness specifications. I have never seen this in the dive equipmentment world. Doesn't mean they don't have it, just never seen it.
By the way, using a slightly harder, better material O-ring is always a good idea with this type of design.
I did a quick check and getting a 70 duro Buta-N o-ring (lowest cost) versus a 75 duro viton (fluorocarbon) increases the cost per o-ring by 5 times - from 2 cents to 10 cents. A lot if one is making thousands, but hardly anything to an individual.
Also, Viton is FDA approved and has an almost infinite life span when setting around, which is not true with Buta-N (except the FDA part).