Valve drill

[TSandM]

The way I understand the process of troubleshooting, it is a process that has a beginning and hopefully a resolution. You begin with the most likely event and work from there. In this case, the GUE approach is that the most likely event is a failure somewhere in the working regulator. (Right valve) At this point you do not know where it is but by eliminating the valve itself and the second stage and hose, you have eliminated one potential spot. In a properly trained diver this process takes seconds. If you still here bubbles or escaping gas, from what you believe is the same area, you should reach the conclusion that it is either a burst disk issue, extruded neck o-ring or even the o rings on the manifold as they enter the right valve. Your immediate action in that case is to shut the isolator, thus preserving your remaining gas supply. In a properly trained diver, these two actions should take seconds to accomplish and in fact this is the primary reason why the GUE approach stresses skill and training. It is a question of trade offs here that you have chosen to "trade off" differently than I have. No harm there, just your view is different than mine. However, because we do not share a common reaction to a perceived problem, we will not be reacting in a similar fashion to that problem. Therein lies the problem and why it would be a bad idea for you and I to do an agressive dive profile together. I am sure you are a marvelous diver as am I however if you push when I think you should pull, we will have problem in an emergency. And this is the beauty of a centralized "authority" if you will as to emergency protocols. I know that every person I dive with in an agressive dive (deco or hard overhead) will react in exactly the same way to the same problem. And furthermore, we train to do this and keep our personal and team skills at a high level. We do not believe in "same day-same ocean" diving for technical dives for the reasons listed above. We have elected to share the same "trade offs" as it were.

Beautiful post, Bismark, and probably as good an analysis of the debate between post and isolator first as I've ever read.

 

[do it easy]

The way I understand the process of troubleshooting, it is a process that has a beginning and hopefully a resolution. You begin with the most likely event and work from there. In this case, the GUE approach is that the most likely event is a failure somewhere in the working regulator. (Right valve) At this point you do not know where it is but by eliminating the valve itself and the second stage and hose, you have eliminated one potential spot. In a properly trained diver this process takes seconds. If you still here bubbles or escaping gas, from what you believe is the same area, you should reach the conclusion that it is either a burst disk issue, extruded neck o-ring or even the o rings on the manifold as they enter the right valve. Your immediate action in that case is to shut the isolator, thus preserving your remaining gas supply. In a properly trained diver, these two actions should take seconds to accomplish and in fact this is the primary reason why the GUE approach stresses skill and training. It is a question of trade offs here that you have chosen to "trade off" differently than I have. No harm there, just your view is different than mine. However, because we do not share a common reaction to a perceived problem, we will not be reacting in a similar fashion to that problem. Therein lies the problem and why it would be a bad idea for you and I to do an agressive dive profile together. I am sure you are a marvelous diver as am I however if you push when I think you should pull, we will have problem in an emergency. And this is the beauty of a centralized "authority" if you will as to emergency protocols. I know that every person I dive with in an agressive dive (deco or hard overhead) will react in exactly the same way to the same problem. And furthermore, we train to do this and keep our personal and team skills at a high level. We do not believe in "same day-same ocean" diving for technical dives for the reasons listed above. We have elected to share the same "trade offs" as it were.

More on the LP inflator issue: I am aware of some very easy to disconnect quick disconnect fitting. However, in my view, the problem with these items is that the very function they are designed to serve creates the additional problem of them disconnecting too easy. I am sure that you have seen standard quick disconnects come disconnected at the damndest times, usually when you don't want them too. I have made a conscious choice to accept that I do not ever want a quick disconnect to come disconnected unless I want it to and I will accept the consequences of this choice. I can shut my right post down and dump air from the rear very quickly in the event of a malfunctioning LP inflator and we practise this in the event of such a failure. You mention that you can disconnect your LP inflator in 1.5 seconds and you practise that. In our experience they have frozen in that time period.

I am enjoying this conversation a lot however, I still feel we are drifting away from the DIR forum rules a bit.......please don't bring up independent doubles

I'm a sucker for joining in but...

First to the OP- try changing your undergarment to something thinner/more flexible or wear no undergarment (in appropriate temps) to see if it's your suit or your underwear that is binding. Those TLS suits are pretty limber! If it's your undergarment, you might consider getting it tailored to allow enough range of motion.

About the valve drill, I won't debate left post versus isolator, but I will point out that the GUE valve drill is "at least partially, disconnected from real diving scenarios." I've interpreted this to mean that the valve drill is an exercise to teach familiarity with the equipment, and not the best tool in a catastrophic gas loss scenario. I think the disconnect is most obvious when the isolator is reopened before exhausting all other possibilities. As far as I know, this is not unique to GUE; all other valve drills that I have been taught have always followed the same fundamental sequence of valve manipulations.

 

[Bismark]

Not to belabor the point, but there are just not that many massive leak failures that will occur with the first stage and a large leak behind you is most likely going to be the burst disc with an extruded o-ring coming in a distant second and shutting down the post will tell you absolutely nothing as it will not even slow down the leak.

Furthermore, a ruptured burst disc can dump an AL80 in not much over a minute. So if you are at the point of maximum pentration, with 2/3rds of, for example, 240 cu ft left, in one minute with a ruptured burst disc you will lose another 1/3rd of your gas and it will be from both tanks, meaning you will not have enough gas left in the remaining tank (by the time you isolate it) to get yourself out. At that point you have just executed a trouble shooting procedure that leaves you reliant on your buddy(ies) gas to get out. Assuming all that gas, silt and confusion puts you in lost buddy situation, things could get interesting.

Otherwise, I agree, most, but not all, failures are most likely to occur with the reg in use - but 99% of the time they will present as a minor leak/stream of bubbles from the first stage or a freeflow from the second stage. The exception here is a leaking HP seat. That will be noticed in the unused back up reg as they start slow and the reg has to be unused for the IP to rise high enough to cause the second stage to vent the excess pressure.

I cut my teeth ice diving and I've had frozen/stuck inflators before. Proper selection of the QD fitting resolves the hard to disconnect inflator issue. If you are going to be diving in 45 degree water with dry gloves, you need to configure for it and select a QD fitting that can be easily manipulated with heavy gloves or dry gloves. Shutting down the right had post is a crutch. Also, you can do one with the left hand and start doing the other with the right if you feel that disconnecting the inflator will not be effective.

Of course, if you practice disconnecting the QD fitting on a reglar basis, you'll either discover you have a less than optimum QD fitting or that it is in fact no big deal and can be done in about a second and a half. The irony here of course is that this approach is taught to cold water Open Water divers all over the place and they seem to manage it just fine. Very odd.

I am also not in agreement that GUE=DIR. All GUE divers will consider themselves to be DIR, but many DIR divers have never taken a GUE class nor do they neccesarily like the politics or kool-aid involved in GUE. This is probably a case in point. DIR does not preclude considering or reconsidering that way things have been done and/or optimizing a configuration for a particular dive, but that is much more controversial with GUE where the development of standards is centralized rather than more grass roots in nature.

I'm a sucker for joining in but...

First to the OP- try changing your undergarment to something thinner/more flexible or wear no undergarment (in appropriate temps) to see if it's your suit or your underwear that is binding. Those TLS suits are pretty limber! If it's your undergarment, you might consider getting it tailored to allow enough range of motion.

About the valve drill, I won't debate left post versus isolator, but I will point out that the GUE valve drill is "at least partially, disconnected from real diving scenarios." I've interpreted this to mean that the valve drill is an exercise to teach familiarity with the equipment, and not the best tool in a catastrophic gas loss scenario. I think the disconnect is most obvious when the isolator is reopened before exhausting all other possibilities. As far as I know, this is not unique to GUE; all other valve drills that I have been taught have always followed the same fundamental sequence of valve manipulations.

I don't disagree with you completely at all. However in my view probably the biggest mistake many people make is that this drill is in itself the complete trouble shooting tool. For example, if I am able to notice escaping gas coming from my left post/valve, am I still going to start the trouble shooting procedure by signalling and shutting down my right valve? Of course not. However, some people make that argument because that is what the "drill" teaches. You are absolutely right that the valve drill is at least partially "an exercise to teach familiarity with equipment" however and their is a certain amount of comfort knowing that I can maintain a narrow buoyancy window while going through an evolution involving gear manipulation. Perhaps even more importantly, I feel warm and fuzzy inside when I see my team mates demonstrate to me they can also do the same. I believe that the tech student/diver will finally see the light bulb go on when he or she is able to insert their brain into this "drill" and understand that it is only a tool to use and not the end all and be all for solving problems. I remember watching my Tech I buddy being faced with a right valve failure while we were ascending and I was breathing off his long hose in an OOG ascent drill. He first went back to shut off his right valve but then stopped and realized what was going to happen (much to my happiness) We were close to the surface and we just continued the ascent with his right post/valve happily bubbling away. That is the kind of example of inserting the brain into the drill that I am talking about and we don't have to look too far to create others.

I think in the end the idea of creating one single "valve drill" per se is our best attempt at combining a series of trouble shooting steps, with muscle memory work and a self reaffirming demonstration of skills. In that sense, it is kind of like a hammer, useful for many more purposes than just hitting things, but pretty good at that also.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

I am enjoying this conversation a lot however, I still feel we are drifting away from the DIR forum rules a bit.......please don't bring up independent doubles

I am also enjoying the conversation - and learning from it.

And I do have limits...I'd NEVER mention side mounts in a DIR forum.

Much of the difference is a difference in perspective. My earliest exposure to DIR was from a cave diver who moved to the frozen north. He was very DIR and I learned an awful lot from him. But over the first year or so, he also learned an awful lot from the local very cold water technical divers and adpated where it made sense - adjusting as needed to dives where the average dive had 40 degree rather than 70 degree bottom temps. The willingness to adapt and even evolve made as much sense to me as any of the rest of DIR.

Will a more aggressively ribbed or even flared QD fitting come loose more easily? Maybe - but not in my experience. If it does it is would also be easier to put back on even in dry gloves. So again, with a run away inflator, my very cold water indoctrinated inclination is to take the immediate action to disconnect the inflator and fall back to a remedial action of shutting down the valve in the unlikely event that does not work.

I guess I look at it in the same vein that I do clearing a jammed weapon. SPORTS for example works fine in the M16/M4 series of weapons except in those situations where it does not, then it actually makes it worse. So there are times when the right thing to do to get back up in minimal time is to skip the standard procedure and fix the problem directly.

I do see your point though and it is well taken regarding standardized procedures, I just don't believe in throwing the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to adapting to specific environments or problems or even (gasp) evolving current practices to consider new and better ones. Neither does DIR (as a separate issue from GUE). If that were the case with the peopel who founded the HOG and derivative DIR philosophies, there would be no DIR and we'd all still be diving double hose regs with horse collar BC's with clunky looking reels and lights just because it worked at the time and we viewed that a less risky approach than trying something new to see if it might work better.

Nemrod would be very pleased.

There is I think a great deal of value in those discussions even if such discussion is not neccesarily GUE compliant. If nothing else it provides the opportunity for much more enlightmenment and thought as to why some things are done the way they are and everyone potentially learns and benefits. Some of the benefit of this type of discussion that "drifts" from the stated intent of the forum is also academic in nature. The only effective and efficient way to validate a hypothesis or theory is to attempt to disprove it. If it can withstand attempts to disprove it's weakest points it deserves to exist. If it does not, then it has still benefitted as there is now a recognized opportunity to evolve and improve to a point where it can withstand that particular argument and over time become a much more valid theory that can be generalized to a much wider environment. If you don't have those discussions, you lose that opportunity.

That said, if you feel this discussion goes to far, PM me and I'll kindly shut up and go dive.

 

[TSandM]

If nothing else it provides the opportunity for much more enlightmenment and thought as to why some things are done the way they are and everyone potentially learns and benefits.

The saddest part of DIR instruction is when the student comes away, having absorbed what was taught without absorbing the "why", and is convinced that what he knows is etched in stone. These sorts of discussions, when they remain civil as this one has, are extremely valuable in letting people know that there ARE alternative viewpoints, and that the people who developed the DIR approach to diving considered them and made choices. Understanding, as much as one can, the reasons behind those choices, makes DIR diving an INFORMED decision, rather than a blind one.

I think that's why this part of the DIR forum was opened to allow this kind of exchange.

 

[Bismark]

The day someone tells me that there is nothing more to learn about the subject and the final word has been spoken so don't look any further will be the day I quit diving and take up golf. What initially attracted me to DIR was the fact that every time I asked a question about something, I was provided with an answer that made sense and more importantly, I was given the background information as to how that answer was arrived at. For me, once I wrapped my head around the "why" it became relatively easy to come up with the "what".

Now time to go diving.....I hear we have 3ft viz today.........most excellent.........

 

[lamont]

About the valve drill, I won't debate left post versus isolator, but I will point out that the GUE valve drill is "at least partially, disconnected from real diving scenarios." I've interpreted this to mean that the valve drill is an exercise to teach familiarity with the equipment, and not the best tool in a catastrophic gas loss scenario. I think the disconnect is most obvious when the isolator is reopened before exhausting all other possibilities. As far as I know, this is not unique to GUE; all other valve drills that I have been taught have always followed the same fundamental sequence of valve manipulations.

There is no argument that the valve drill is just an exercise.

The actual process in a nutshell involves signaling your buddy, shutting down the post you think failed, then leaving it closed, purging the reg attached to that post, shutting down the isolator if the bubbles don't stop, then getting your buddy involved to make sure it got fixed right. The full process GUE teaches is called "the nine failures", but that isn't taught in fundamentals, it is taught in tech1 and cave1.

 

[Bismark]

There is no argument that the valve drill is just an exercise.

The actual process in a nutshell involves signaling your buddy, shutting down the post you think failed, then leaving it closed, purging the reg attached to that post, shutting down the isolator if the bubbles don't stop, then getting your buddy involved to make sure it got fixed right. The full process GUE teaches is called "the nine failures", but that isn't taught in fundamentals, it is taught in tech1 and cave1.

Like he said............

Viz was actually closer to 5'...........awesome......

 

[Hyper-limits]

Like he said............

Viz was actually closer to 5'...........awesome......

Herderson or Willis?

 

[AndyNZ]

Andy, I think you are missing a bit of the point. I notice from your profile that you have taken fundamentals. Let me assure you that in Tech I or Tech II if you were unable to reach either valve or your isolator yourself when faced with a simulated failure, you would not pass the class.

I'm not disagreeing with that at all... just perhaps suggesting that the pass isn't the important thing, it's awarenss of limitations in the first place - but also knowing that there are always options, whether it be loosening the belt or getting a team mate involved. There is always more than one option to solving any underwater problem.

Moreover, nothing personal here but I would not consider you for a teammate for a decompression dive if you were unable to shut your own valves off yourself without first going through the process of needing to loosen your waist belt: that is my gas that is blowing out of your valve and if you can't shut it off quickly and effeciently I would not do an overhead environment dive with you--virtual or otherwise.

No offence taken, rest assured. I'm fairly thick skinned and enjoy a healthy discussion where various points of view are articulate and reasoned.

Anyway, I know that there are many reasons why you probably wouldn't want to dive with me - but as this is the DIR forum, I won't list them!

What would you do if you suffered a wing inflator failure? You do not have time to "first loosen your waist belt" before you need to begin shutting down your right valve. Now your teammate watches you begin an uncontrolled ascent with their gas in your tanks....let alone the consequences for your self. You need to turn this on it's head: It is not about you- it is about your team members. Long story short, from a DIR perspective, If you cannot shut that valve down yourself immediately, you have no business being at 55M.

A good example of a well articulated point of view (though you will have to enlighten me why closing down the right post is the correct response to a sticky inflator). And I agree with it, in principle, but in practice there are ways of dealing with any situation if you are aware of the issue. For example, my crotch strap is maybe a little looser than would be considered "optimal" - I know that I have difficulties with my left post, the slack (half an inch or so) in my crotch strap lets me shift the rig up slightly when needed. I can shut the valve down in less than 15 seconds... but if it's taking longer for some reason and I'm not happy, and a team member isn't on to it (hey, they should be thinking about me!) then I've got no qualms about loosening the belt a little. I acknowledge that it may not be the DIR way, and hence maybe not the right place for discussing it, but it can be done quickly.

What is more important, to my mind, is knowing that the people I'm diving with no my issues and I know there's. The way we dive, and what we do, is tailored to suit that.