Info Technical Discussion | HOTDIVE Diving Equipment Development

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

I just got this strange package in the mail. It's not ticking, so I'll do an unboxing in the next couple of days.


I can't help but thinking of the old saying: "Your first line of coke is always free"

Of course it rarely ends that way there is always a reason for the free gift so I just wonder what that will be for the forum in the foreseeable future. Maybe we are gearing up for new forum owners from China.
or something deeper makes me wonder what happened to wonderful American US Divers Corp ending up as mask fins and snorkels outlet bought up by Yifei Huang or PADI and the new owners aptly names Mandarin Fish and the connection with Siniperca chuatsi. Just a thought.
 
Thank you for the photos!

What is the main advantages of a sharp vs rounded knife edge?
Which would you prefer?
Tough to say.. realistically I’d say rounded as they are much easier to maintain, restore and deal with; also I doubt that anyone makes sharp ones anymore (if there were mk10 mew pistons I would have bought them already)
Sharp ones lockup super crisp

With time the rounded edges became more precise and better at locking up (comapre the really old pistons of the early mk20s with the new composite ones)

The thing with piston restoration also became the shortening of the piston (thus raising IP), this is
1. More dramatic in a sharp edge (to maintain the shape)
2. Comparing an mk10 vs 25; I also get the IP adjustment screw so I don’t have to keep experimenting with shims

For my personal mk20/25s I even get an extra benefit — but that’s very personal choice
There tends to be most of the time no indents in the HP seat, so technically I can reuse them (after inspection)
So almost most of the time I just need new orings for service

Let me put it like that, If I could get conical HP seats for mk10s at a reasonable price and it had an external adjustment, I would have hedged more to sharp pistons — but the world doesn’t work that way sadly
 
Tough to say.. realistically I’d say rounded as they are much easier to maintain, restore and deal with; also I doubt that anyone makes sharp ones anymore (if there were mk10 mew pistons I would have bought them already)
Sharp ones lockup super crisp

With time the rounded edges became more precise and better at locking up (comapre the really old pistons of the early mk20s with the new composite ones)

The thing with piston restoration also became the shortening of the piston (thus raising IP), this is
1. More dramatic in a sharp edge (to maintain the shape)
2. Comparing an mk10 vs 25; I also get the IP adjustment screw so I don’t have to keep experimenting with shims

For my personal mk20/25s I even get an extra benefit — but that’s very personal choice
There tends to be most of the time no indents in the HP seat, so technically I can reuse them (after inspection)
So almost most of the time I just need new orings for service

Let me put it like that, If I could get conical HP seats for mk10s at a reasonable price and it had an external adjustment, I would have hedged more to sharp pistons — but the world doesn’t work that way sadly
Interesting. Thank you!

If i remember correctly @rsingler called the S2 "squared-off knife edge".
 
Interesting. Thank you!

If i remember correctly @rsingler called the S2 "squared-off knife edge".
Good memory, I forgot about that. I guess slim enough (modern style) to have good lockup without the triangular shape of a sharp one

Btw regarding the shape thing and restoration:
About four months ago, I posted a thread on How to restore a Piston Regulator that has IP creep . In probably excessive detail, we walked through how to restore a piston regulator with a blunt-end piston. Most newer pistons have switched from knife-edge pistons to blunt pistons with a cone seat. They’ve proved more reliable at sealing, and less prone to damage.

But for those of you that love vintage gear like a Mk 5,
View attachment 534812
a Mk 7 “honker”
View attachment 534813
or an original Mk 10,
View attachment 534814
you’ll need to be able to restore a knife edge piston.
View attachment 535005
Unlike the rounded edge of a blunt end piston like a Mk10+, a Mk20 or a Mk25, the knife edge piston seals with a sharp edge that digs into the seat.
View attachment 535003

There’s no need to go through all the detail of that first thread again here. Since these are likely vintage regs, the high pressure piston shaft oring is captured deep in the bore of the reg body. So perhaps take a peek at the thread How to use a Double Hook Pick to assist you with disassembly. Otherwise, the same concepts of evaluating IP creep, parts cleaning and reassembly apply.

But let’s take a look at the unique feature of these regs: the knife-edge piston. It originally sealed against a flat seat, and the match had to be perfect. In fact, you can use the new cone seats that were introduced for these regs later, and we’ll take a look at why. But the biggest factors that cause leaks in these old regs are scratches on the shaft of the piston (where HP air slowly leaks out the ambient chamber holes, as can be demonstrated when the reg is submerged), or nicks in the knife edge itself (causing IP creep). Both occur from technician mishandling. The shaft can be scored against the bore of the regulator body if a piston is removed or inserted in anything but a perfectly straight direction. And the knife edge is susceptible to a host of ills: clanking against other metal parts in the ultrasonic cleaner, falling over on a metal workbench, being dropped or even (!!) being pushed out of the regulator with a screwdriver.

Here’s an original Mk5/Mk7 piston with a deep nick right on the knife edge:
View attachment 534991
It’s no surprise that there was significant IP creep and resultant freeflow from the second stage.
How do we fix it?

Well, you can’t just sand it flat. A knife edge piston works against a flat seat because there is sufficient force to indent the plastic of the seat with the metal of the piston. That requires a knife edge because of the firmness of the HP seat needed to withstand tank pressure, not just intermediate pressure.

Here’s some math, and if you want, just skip this section.
Assume the Intermediate Pressure (IP) is 130 pounds per square inch. The diameter of the Mk5 piston head is about 1 1/4". Using our high school math formula for area (πr2), with a piston head area of about 1.22 sq in, that means that there are about 166 pounds pushing on that shaft, and it’s all concentrated on the thin knife edge. It’s enough to dig into the plastic and create a seal. What is the area of that knife edge? If you examine the depression in an old seat, you’ll see a thin ring maybe 2/100’s of an inch wide. 166 pounds concentrated on that little line is equivalent to thousands of pounds per square inch of contact area. No wonder it seals!
Now if you grind the piston knife edge flat, you increase the contact area by 2-10 times, depending upon how much of the knife edge you convert to a dull flat. This substantially reduces the pounds per square inch that the piston places on any given portion of the HP seat, with the result that it can no longer withstand the adjacent 2,000-3,000 pounds per square inch of tank pressure, and IP creep results.

The way to attempt to maintain the knife edge is to carve out (slowly sand out) metal from the inside of the piston shaft in the same angle originally machined, until the nick disappears.

Depending upon the size of the nick, it can be a tedious process, removing all that metal:
Here’s a schematic knife edge piston shaft end, in cross-section and side views.
View attachment 534809
Here’s a nick, same views:
View attachment 534808
And here’s what we have to accomplish:
View attachment 534810

The key to the process is a product called Micromesh.
Essentially cloth backed Wet-Or-Dry sandpaper, it comes in grits from 1,200 to 12,000.
For our purposes, 2,400 to 8,000 will suffice.
View attachment 534817
See next post...
 
cost more than the original one in the US.:eek::eek::eek:
I guess it does.

But another aspect that doesn't add up is I checked the Hotdive website for their CE certificate they claim to have achieved.


Turns out its not what you think it is in that they state and I quote:

"Certificate of Compliance ... The product described above has been tested by us and found in compliance with the council CE Directive 2011/65/EU Annex II (EU) 2015/863 as last amended by Directive (EU) 2017/2102." (end quote)

This is a hugely misleading and frankly a possible fraudulent claim.

1. Its a certificate of Compliance not the required CE certificate

2. It has no independent testing in fact they clearly state "tested by us"

3. CE Directive 2011/65/EU Annex II they claim for their diving gear is in fact
for the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment
for the content of lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls, polybrominated diphenyl ethers in electrical and electronic equipment.

4. "(EU) 2015/863 as last amended by Directive (EU) 2017/2102."
(EU)2017/2102 is a short document that clarifies some language and addresses the use of spare parts and pipe organs (go figure)

5. While EU)2015/863 is a much more important document because it added four new substances to the Annex II list above for four types of phthalates. Phthalates, are chemical plasticizers that are added to synthetic diester and triester lubricants used in scuba compressors. They also are used to make plastic PVC more pliable in plastic baby milk bottle teats.

6. I would therefore suggest that it may be quite possible that the (self tested) CE certificate
may turn out to stand for a China Export (CE) product than a EU independently certified CE product that is required by law

7. I guess I now know why you have to self import their products direct from China. And why no American or European diving company can import or distribute for you.

8. Now that you all know. Beware of free gifts from China I guess. Fan boys and scuba Guru influencers may disagree.....Feel free.


hotdive.org

https://hotdive.org › wp-content › uploads › 2022 › 09 › HD-Scuba-Regulator-Set-Certificate.pdf

Certificate of Compliance

Certificate of Compliance ... The product described above has been tested by us and found in compliance with the council CE Directive 2011/65/EU Annex II (EU) 2015/863 as last amended by Directive (EU) 2017/2102.
 
1. Its a certificate of Compliance not the required CE certificate

You should review what's required for (EU) CE marking; it is a self-certification. No independent testing or review is required for most directives.

(I always did when I worried about this stuff, but that's risk management, not requirement.)
 
I don’t fully understand the itty-bitties of CE legalese, but..
7. I guess I now know why you have to self import their products direct from China. And why no American or European diving company can import or distribute for you.
Isn’t scubagaskets already doing that? Selling them in the EU 🤔
They even mentioned (SG) in another thread that the names of the reg couldn’t be changed because it would mean recertification

8. Now that you all know. Beware of free gifts from China I guess. Fan boys and scuba Guru influencers may disagree.....Feel free.
Can’t speak for others, but I am for sure no influencer — far cry from it (do warn me if I’m perceived as one, I might need to pivot back to hermit online presence)

If some company that makes a product I am interested in (its category) in a bit of a nerdy way (like others that hangout on the Regulators or Rebreathers subforum for example), decides to give me free samples to try and see if I like them, and also listen to thoughts and input on places to improve on: I’m absolutely game

I’ll dissect it and say my thoughts (pro and con) about it as I did with other regs I got and posted about — I’m an engineer that likes to dissect things as a special interest part of a hobby; first thing I do when I add a new piece to the hoard of regs I have is open it up and share with the class (unless it has been covered already)

I thought that was the whole point of equipment subforums; to talk about equipment and make info available to people who look for it (Esp on the DIY side of things) 🤷🏽‍♀️

I doubt we have influencers around here, but who can see into peoples hearts (or private digital feeds)
 
Regulators sold in the EU have to conform to BS EN250:2014 as stated in (EU) 2016/425 and require a certification by a named body.
Exactly Thank you
 
I don’t fully understand the itty-bitties of CE legalese, but..
Clearly you don't but from what they claim to test is for companies that are manufacturing plastic baby bottle teats or electrical or electronic equipment. As for scuba regulators their claim is totally misleading irrelevant to scuba gear let alone regulators and at best lies and deceit.

Isn’t scubagaskets already doing that? Selling them in the EU 🤔
Look carefully at the scuba gaskets website and guess what? clearly on their website you the buyer are also the importer. Scuba gaskets take you money but the regulator is shipped direct from China.

This is known as Drop Shipping

You are therefore the importer and if by chance you re sell or distribute in either EU or UK you will be liable as the importer and are bound by the legal requirements of CE for BS EN 250:2014

Frankly Its another deceitful way around using scuba gaskets as the front man but negating having to pay themselves for the legally required independent CE testing

NEW Scuba Gaskets​

  • Drop Shipping Product
  • This product is subjected to VAT and some minor Import fees upon reception by EU Customers
  • For non-EU customers, the recipient’s country rules apply as usual.
  • Proudly Manufactured by: Narwhal Technology Co.Ltd CN

If a product, which falls under the CE marking obligation (which all scuba regulators do) is not affixed with the CE marking or is unlawfully affixed with the CE marking, (ie CE China Export mark) the government of each specific member state will enforce legal measures. Products normally are withdrawn from the market or seized at customs and penalties can be imposed. Manufacturers, importers and/or authorised representatives will be held liable if the CE mark has been fixed illegally or if the product does not meet the standards indicated by the EU harmonised standards.

For each directive or product group, one or more supervisory authorities or inspection services have been designated at a national level in the EU countries. These institutions often government bodies- inspect products not only for CE marking but also for other legal aspects.

In the EU each product is classified by product group, these can be found on the website of the European Commission. Failure to affix the required CE marking on a required product or not having a valid EU Declaration of Conformity or certificate of independent testing is a violation. Penalties of up to 6 months in custody can be imposed, and or fines of 20,500 euros.

The only folk they cannot touch are the manufacturer in China and the poor lad at Scuba Gaskets in Cyprus better take some legal advise sharpish as Cyprus has been a member of the EU since May 2004
 

Back
Top Bottom