Z-system gas switching

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!

Right from AG,

The Z-Iso manifold connects the two tanks together, allows the gas to be distributed, and also enables left and right side isolation. That means the diver can start with “All Open” and distribute the 2 inputs (left and right) to 6 outputs (two breathing, 2 buoyancy and 2 rebreather.) By configuring the isolatable manifold in a consistent fashion with UTD/DIR back gas we are able to put 4 on one side and 4 on the other, and because they are isolatable, this creates redundancy and dramatically increases safety. We can configure the right side (primary side) with primary input, primary breathing, primary buoyancy and primary diluents (rebreather) and the left side with secondary or back-up input, breathing (necklace or BOV) , buoyancy and rebreather. So to re-iterate, the long hose primary regulator and bcd are still on the right, the necklace backup regulator and dry suit are still on the left and they are isolatable, like UTD/DIR back mount, thus eliminating a single point of failure. Of course the isolating manifold becomes unnecessary in recreational single tank Z-Side-mount and we have a simple Z-Manifold or Distribution block that is not isolatable to supply gas to the regulators and buoyancy system.

In general, side mount diving is commonly thought when using 2 or more primary cylinders that are secured alongside and in line with the divers’ body. The Z-Side-mount system, however, is “scalable” for use with one cylinder, two cylinders, three etc. and can even accommodate a rebreather. This one system is capable of all configurations. In recreational diving, side mount is commonly conducted with just one cylinder at the divers’ side and no cylinders on the back. The side mount configuration incorporates the use of bungee cords, bolt snaps, and D-rings to attach the cylinders alongside the diver. The Z-Side-mount system weighs less than a normal back mount configuration; this makes the system much more popular for dive travel.
 
For the life of me I can't understand why taking a completely redundant beautifully simple system like a sidemount and adding a host of islolators, manifolds and extra fittings could be considered an improvement.
The OC DIR/Hogarthian double tank system is a great, simple and highly functional system. An independent side mount system is also a very functional system. Trying to make one like the other is not an improvement on either system.

If you are diving with a sidemount team there is virtually no single failure that would require donating gas. Routing all your hoses to a central gas block puts all your eggs in one basket and causes a common failure point that now does require gas donation because any number of single failures can render a diver completely out of gas.
The concept of doing this to enable mixed teams makes no sense because side mount is designed to go places backmount can't.
This at best is a system trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist and at worst a big money grab designed to part new "tech" divers who don't know any better from their hard earned money.

I have to agree with this. All of it.


Sent from my She-er-water Per-redator!
 
Right from AG,

The Z-Iso manifold connects the two tanks together, allows the gas to be distributed, and also enables left and right side isolation. That means the diver can start with “All Open” and distribute the 2 inputs (left and right) to 6 outputs (two breathing, 2 buoyancy and 2 rebreather.) By configuring the isolatable manifold in a consistent fashion with UTD/DIR back gas we are able to put 4 on one side and 4 on the other, and because they are isolatable, this creates redundancy and dramatically increases safety. We can configure the right side (primary side) with primary input, primary breathing, primary buoyancy and primary diluents (rebreather) and the left side with secondary or back-up input, breathing (necklace or BOV) , buoyancy and rebreather. So to re-iterate, the long hose primary regulator and bcd are still on the right, the necklace backup regulator and dry suit are still on the left and they are isolatable, like UTD/DIR back mount, thus eliminating a single point of failure. Of course the isolating manifold becomes unnecessary in recreational single tank Z-Side-mount and we have a simple Z-Manifold or Distribution block that is not isolatable to supply gas to the regulators and buoyancy system.

In general, side mount diving is commonly thought when using 2 or more primary cylinders that are secured alongside and in line with the divers’ body. The Z-Side-mount system, however, is “scalable” for use with one cylinder, two cylinders, three etc. and can even accommodate a rebreather. This one system is capable of all configurations. In recreational diving, side mount is commonly conducted with just one cylinder at the divers’ side and no cylinders on the back. The side mount configuration incorporates the use of bungee cords, bolt snaps, and D-rings to attach the cylinders alongside the diver. The Z-Side-mount system weighs less than a normal back mount configuration; this makes the system much more popular for dive travel.

Sorry Jay but Andrew's sales pitch is as much convoluted gobbledygook as the system itself. I was hoping you might offer some personal insight to this thread.
 
I took the system as an "out of the box" thinking exercise that works for muscle memory but might not actually solve anything.


Sent from my She-er-water Per-redator!
 
Sorry Jay but Andrew's sales pitch is as much convoluted gobbledygook as the system itself. I was hoping you might offer some personal insight to this thread.

No kidding.

I dive a DIR/Hogarthian configuration when in backmount and I would not be able to understand all the hoses, QC6s, and which valve on the SM tanks was on or off at any given time. Yes, the thing that AG keeps missing and never talks about is that to switch tanks and balance the consumption you STILL have to actually shut down one SM cylinder and open the other. Its not exactly like OC doubles with an isolation manifold and it never can be because a HP manifold and a LP manifold will never work exactly the same.

In OC doubles, the valves are all open all the time unless there's a failure. With the Z they are not. Adding a switchblock makes this even worse because now there's even more potential gases/tanks you could be breathing and since switchblocks face down in the chest how on earth am I as a buddy supposed to figure out what you are breathing?

There's nothing "unified" about mixed teams whatsoever. Get over it, dive however you like, but UTD needs to stop lying to people that an OC doubles diver, a Z system diver, and a mCCR diver are all nice and seamlessly integrating. Complete BS.

---------- Post added November 21st, 2012 at 10:56 AM ----------

Funny, I brought this up a while back and was poo pooed on for being a crappy diver because I wanted to reduce the task loading while diving. Interesting.

What part of diving SM do you find a task load? I'm not here to rip you, just figure out where you think the problem is with your current configuration (whatever that is, so provide some background or a link to this earlier discussion please)
 
No real insights, what I see is AG wants equipment configuration to hold true to the tennents. The benefits of the Z system (including iso manifold) are; enables diver to donate long hose as its always proven as a working reg. With the QC6, it is "scalable and adaptable" in that it works with all the UTD levels from ZUBA to SM rebreather. I do dive in mixed teams (SM and BM) and having consistant configurations when it comes to s drills makes life a bit easier.

Now if you we're to ask me my current SM set up, it's independent doubles with a long hose on each bottle. That's what I'm comfortable with, although, like my BM rigs, as the utd diver base here grows and I'm required to switch set ups and teach more variety, I plan on diving the QC6/iso manifold more.

We've really hijacked this thread, but I know that's a foregone conclusion whenever UTD or Z system is mentioned, but as always I like hearing different takes on everything.
 
Ok so I'm still trying to figure out what this system brings to the table. Kev has told us it's better cause he likes diving it in Chuuk and DA has told us he likes it because he dives in mixed teams and wants a long hose to share and more gas I guess. He also mentioned that since the addition of the isolator he feels the system is less dangerous.
What I haven't heard is what advantage justifies the added complexity, added failure points and expense over a conventional independent sidemount system? It has to more than not switching regs, surely?
No. You've misread.

1. I'm giving AG credit for resolving the single point of failure issue with an isolator,
2. I'm acknowledging what he's trying to accomplish by allowing a standard DIR hose routing, and
3. I'm agreeing/stating there is a need for a long hose in sidemount if you ever dive mixed BM/SM teams (and that's a separate issue from however people want to define a "unified team").

But I'm also stating:

4. the Z-system adds excessive complexity,
5. two 5' hoses is a much simpler solution to the "always need to breathe a long hose" problem as you are once again always breathing a long hose regardless of what tank you're on, and
6. at $1700, the Z system is way too expensive to buy just to try, especially when a pair of 5' hoses are all of $70.

We're in total agreement that nothing about the Z-system justifies the added complexity, added failure points and expense over a conventional independent sidemount system.

-----

I think some of the debate always centers on Andrew and how people feel about him. Personally I like him, I like how he thinks and I am in agreement with the philosophy of always questioning and looking for improvement. I keep that separate however from my views of the Z-system. The Z-system just does not work for me, but it's also nothing personal and not about Andrew or his viewpoints.
 
I have to agree, AG is a great guy. When I bought my UTD wing he was very helpful. I just don't agree with the entire z system.

---------- Post added November 21st, 2012 at 05:40 PM ----------

Plus, he is trying something different and innovating.
 
I think some of the debate always centers on Andrew and how people feel about him. Personally I like him, I like how he thinks and I am in agreement with the philosophy of always questioning and looking for improvement. I keep that separate however from my views of the Z-system. The Z-system just does not work for me, but it's also nothing personal and not about Andrew or his viewpoints.

I like AG as well, however I also know him well enough to realize he's never been a sidemount cave diver. I might just have more sidemount cave dives than he does and I'm not trying to create something "unified" while glossing over some pretty fundemental differences all for the sake of the not so urgent need to always breathing a long hose.

Nobody is breathing OC deco bottles or stages with long hoses - amazingly we survive.
Nobody puts long hoses on their OC bailout on CCRs or SCRs - again, doesn't seem to be a problem.
Feathering left and right valves to switch SM tanks and using switch blocks for gas switches prevents me as a buddy for verifying what you're breathing based on the reg in your mouth.

Creating a real problem while trying to solve 2 non-existent ones is false economy. And as you point out very expensive $$ too.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom