Can you share where you saw this?reading elsewhere that the factory spec for cracking pressure is supposed to be 0.5".
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
Can you share where you saw this?reading elsewhere that the factory spec for cracking pressure is supposed to be 0.5".
BTW, adjustment of the cracking effort is exactly like the D400: just unscrew the top cap with a small pin face spanner and use a standard screwdriver to unscrew the cap which adjusts poppet spring pressure.
Can you share where you saw this?
Does the Atomic (Scubatools) 1st stage tool fit the TFX top cap?BTW, adjustment of the cracking effort is exactly like the D400: just unscrew the top cap with a small pin face spanner and use a standard screwdriver to unscrew the cap which adjusts poppet spring pressure.
Based on what I know about car engine exhaust valves, I *think* the Pi * r^2 thing is not the right comparison. I think the correct way to compare is by circumference. 29.5 / 27 yields a 9% increase. Still nothing to sneeze at.
Engine valves are an incomplete model. They are solid and the entire valve is pulled away from the port. The area that the exhaust gases can escape from is the circumference of the valve times the height of the lift. In other words it's the surface area of the walls of a cylinder or Pi*diameter*height. So yes, if keeping the lift the same when modifying your engine, the exhaust area only increases by the circumference. Which is the primary reason manufacturers shift to multiple valves per cylinder when trying to increase performance.Good point that the cross section of a tube may apply less than the circumference. I'd add to that that the flexibility of the diaphragm will dictate how far it folds open. The more flexible it is, the more the cross section may come into play as well (i.e. the flow increase may go beyond 9%).
Do you think cutting slits in the collar might help the D’s.View attachment 796845
But the diaphragm retainer is a very thin plastic piece, and incorporating threading might make it a deal breaker for 3D.
As I'm continuing to think about this it occurs to me that we are neglecting the force needed to open the valve which might the real advantage of larger valves. If we think of a section of the valve from center to edge as a lever, you'll obviously need less force to start moving that edge as the length increases. Which means it should open at a smaller increase in pressure over ambient. Right?How do exhaust valves actually deform?
Looking at your previous photo showing the tfx and d400 diaphragm assemblies it’s hard to believe they are from different manufacturers. Did I hear that the designer of the d series now works for Atomic. It will be interesting as different components are revealed
Works for Atomic might be a bit of an understatement. More like started Atomic. Along with the designer of the G series.Did I hear that the designer of the d series now works for Atomic.