Regs & Nitrox

[rainreg]

Hey Blacknet, I am impressed with the research you are doing and thats the way it should be. I have provided you with numerous documents and information to go on, I can provide this with no problem, it seems that every time you ask the question else where especially with DR you will get 40% rule out the B___. But the bottom line is proof, which I have thanks to the years of hard work by facilities such as NASA and White sands Test Facility. I did a seminar for DEMA a few years back and provided this information as well as the info on use of EPDM O-rings vise Viton, Well most of the manufacturers today are using EPDM in their regs. I guess someone is listening... also the reason the manufacturers are running with the 40% rule is 1) they would have to have an O2 cleanroom, 2) they would have to have all of their Nitrox regs go through extensive testing 3) they would have to certify to 100% o2 cleanliness standards. All of these add up to an enormous cost increase which they are not ready to handle. The documentation and Offical testing state 25% so that what I do and will do until proven otherwise. Lastly on the DTIC link you want to go through the " potential DoD contractor" portion, there is alot of leway with that particular section otherwise you can try the other link http://www.ntis.gov/ either way you can go through them or through me I have quite an extensive Technical Library of my own. safe diving

Michael Rainone
Sat Rat

 

[blacknet]

Hello,

You and me both! I have *NO* problem adhering to 25% o2 for cleaning (then again I also disagree with CGA's 1000ppm co2 levels but that's a different matter) With the equipment companies it's like a lawyer friend told me, you either pay for it now in small amounts (extra cost in lube, maintance, and equipment) or pay for it in one large lump sum with a lawsuit when someone sues them.

Now the *ONLY* test restults I have seem stated something like 23.5% or 25% (somewhere in that area) and never have I seen anything stating 40% but that's what the industry's going with. Untill they get this mess strait i'll be very happy with my o2 clean cylinders and religiously documenting fills/work performed/usage.

Ed

 

[Iguana Don]

It seems to me that the Navy is contradicting itself.

UNITED STATES NAVY OXYGEN SPECIFICATIONS

U.S. MIL-STD-777E (SH) Note K-6-4, Cat. K.6

Mixed Gas, 4500 PSI Service, 150'F Max
For systems with oxygen content greater than 40% by volume, oxygen systems components shall be cleaned in accordance with the requirements of MIL-STD-1330.

also....

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD OXYGEN SPECIFICATIONS

Title 46 -- Shipping, revised as of October 1, 1992

Chapter I -- Coast Guard, Department of Transportation

Subchapter V -- Marine Occupational Safety and Health Standards

Part 197 -- General Provisions

Subpart B -- Commercial Diving Operations

Periodic Tests and Inspection of Diving Equipment

§ 197.452 Oxygen cleaning.

46 CFR 197.451

The diving supervisor shall ensure that equipment used with oxygen or oxygen mixtures greater than 40 percent by volume is cleaned of flammable materials --

(a) Before being placed into service; and

(b) After any repair, alteration, modification, or suspected contamination.

SOURCE: CCD 76-009, 43 FR 53683, Nov. 16, 1978.

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1509; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 6101; 49 CFR 1.46

For systems with oxygen content greater than 40% by volume, oxygen systems components shall be cleaned in accordance with the requirements of MIL-STD-1330.

ID

 

[blacknet]

Hello,

Looks like 777 was revised in 1998 and they deemed that many sections of it was unacceptable and made modifications.
FYI, mil-std-777 states (updated version)

Notes
K-1-l
K-2-1
K-6-1
Oxygen system components shall be cleaned in accordance with requirementsof MIL-STD-1330. (which states 25%)


BTW these excerpts you pasted came from Dick Rutkowski that I already posted above (see the dnax link).

As it has already been stated the osha and the coast guard are not 'official' standards (see rainreg's post on this above)

Ed

 

[The Chairman]

Hey all,

Both of these agencies have put the need for Oxy cleaning at %23.5! Sounds suspiciously to me like someone has WAY too much time on their hands or wants everyone to spend a lot of money. Beurocracy at it's finest!

The "almost" universal %40 sounds about right to me. There are so many ways to make a cylinder/regulator unclean that we would be wasting most of our diving time oxy cleaning everything in sight. It would be worse than a rebreather! You can argue your point that %25 (or even %23.5)is the safest road to take. I would like to ask when was the last time that you had a verified problem MUCH LESS heard of a bonified explosion and/or fire that was the result of improper O2 cleaning? Not in my town at least. I have heard of rumors of city blocks being demolished, and most of that is just an urban myth. Clean your tanks once a year before they get visualed, and you will be more than fine. The regs just shouldn't need it, unless you are running 50% or higher O2. Yeah, I said %50.

 

[rainreg]

Hello again, hey Iguana Don good job on the research but again this information is out-dated and well, the navy does not contridict itself they update and upgrade the processes as new information is brought forward. IE since 1997 all component cleaning in accordance with 1330 series mil standard clean all components based on the 25% and above rule. as for the Coast Guard remark not too sure about that either they do not do any of their own cleaning they farm their work out to either a navy or DOD run Clean room facility. keep checking it out thee really is alot of misinformation out there and alot of people will use it to sell their ideas but the facts remain solid. take care and keep up the good work.

rainreg

 

[Lost Yooper]

Then, of course, there are plenty of those who do NO (as in zero, zip, zilch, notta) O2 cleaning of ANY sort for partial pressure mixtures up to 100% O2 and never have ANY problems. Don't fool yourselves, this is done a lot more than is admitted to, and people aren't blowing themselves up everyday. I think it comes down to practical/reality facts vs. theoretical/laboratory facts again.

For some people, some organizations, and some gov't agencies, anything less than 100% safe isn't good enough for some things, but for other things less than perfectly safe is OK. I won't argue one way or the other here, but there is definately more to the story regarding O2 cleaning.

Mike

I'd stretch as far to say that liability and money "probably" have more do with the subject than the physics of it -- but that's just my laymans point of view.

 

[blacknet]

Hello,

LY, you trying to tell us something? Remind me never to let you fill or do any service work on my equipment.

Ed

 

[The Chairman]

Hey Mike, and all...

I think the real problem is that there are many people who make out like O2 cleaning is akin to Voodoo magic... a lost and arkane art, if you will. It'll cost you $35 to have your tank O2 cleaned... and the next bad air fill you have ruins it??? I would rather wash my tanks out myself, treat the steel and dry it thoroughly on an annual basis. That way, I can hedge my bets on how clean those air compressors are. Without a doubt, I take more time and better care of my equipment than a professional will or even can. I am not racing against a clock, and I just won't "make do". It's my tush on the line, and I am more than willing to learn all I need to, and then take the extra time to make my equipment perfect!

 

[Iguana Don]

LY,
I agree with you on this. I think there is a lot more to it than we the public are being told. If I was in the space shuttle, hell I would want the toilet paper O2 cleaned.

Basically the Navy is saying anything other than air, (not much difference between 21% & 25%) needs to be O2 cleaned. That means you would have to have a dedicated Nitrox BC as well as a Nitrox reg. I have checked around and can not find any recorded incidents of explosions resulting from unclean O2 diving gear.

Considering the amount of certified Nitrox divers following the 40% rule, I think it has been proven in "actual real world field testing" to be safe far beyond what can be tested in the labratory.

But I would be interested in reading the tests conducted at White Sands.

ID