First Regulator Use after Service

[PhilEllis]

Phil: But after I get my oil changed, I still go check the level the next day and make sure there are no new leaks. Even if I change the oil myself (like on my motorbikes).

To me, that's just common sense. O-rings on oil filters can be easily pinched / not seated correctly, crush washes on drain plugs may not seal, someone could have gotten the torque specs wrong. Just like there could be something that didn't go right on a reg service.

I think doing a cautious dive to ensure everything is working as expected is a prudent course of action and not necessarily a negative reflection on the person doing the servicing.

To me, this is the same as analyzing my own gas. Sure the person who does the blending is trained and I trust them to follow the correct methods, but I still get the analyzer out and check it myself before diving it...

Just my $0.02

I stand corrected.

Phil Ellis

 

[DA Aquamaster]

To DA's comments.....if the manufacturer says that a regulator should be set with an initial opening effort of 1.4 inches of water, that is how you set them. I don't think it is safe and fair to the consumer to engage in the business of making a regulator perform better than it was intended. The typical poppet valve found in the lower end second stages (almost all brands) are designed to open at around 1.4 - 1.6 inches of water WITHOUT a severe risk of freeflows. Setting them any easier simply increases the likelyhood of freeflow. Some of the higher quality balanced, integrated air tube second stages can be set much lower. On the issue of soft seat break-in, that is done here IN OUR STORE. We create 85% of any seat demarcation right here in the store BEFORE we adjust and test the regulator. There isn't much left to happen after the customer gets the regulator.

Phil, no offense, but 1.4" to 1.6" of water is poor performance when compared to the 1.0" to 1.2" of water performace that used to be standard with a comparable entry level non balanced, non adjustable second stage like the Scubapro High Performance (R108) over 30 years ago. As an example, in the early to mid 1980's a well tuned R108 breathed as well at high tank pressures as a well tuned Balanced Adjustable (R156) or G250. The difference between the two was only noticeable at lower tank pressures on less expensive unbalanced first stages.

Part of the problem is that industry wide, reg quality has gotten worse (more plastic parts, plastic orifices, etc.) but a l;arge part of the problem is the idea that inexpensive second stages need not perform well and that better inhalation performance comes with a higher price tag. The end result has been acceptance of breathe like a rock specs that shops and techs fear to depart from for liability reasons and that companies maintain primarily to create an incentive to upgrade to more expensive regulators. You demonstrate that very nicely when you state "I don't think it is safe and fair to the consumer to engage in the business of making a regulator perform better than it was intended.". Oddly, I don't hear customers saying "Well...gosh when you put it that way I sure wish you'd tune my reg to perform crappier like it was intended to do."

I'm really glad you have the equipment to do most of the break in of your seats before the reg leaves the shop. It's a waste of effort and quality equipment though if you do not tune them to take advantage of it.

For example, the general pre seat break-in equipment standard was to use a "12 to 1" approach where the orifice is adjusted until no freeflow occurs, then turn the orifice in 1/12th of a turn farther in to anticipate the eventual effect of the formation of a seating groove. This was then cross checked with an inhalation test to ensure that the resulting inhalation effort was not so low as to cause a freeflow between inhalations due to CGF issues (normally about 1.0 of water on a second stage of standard case design). 99.9% of the time this is enough to prevent any freeflow once the seating groove forms. (As an aside, even without a machine to break in the seat, much of the same break in effect can be accomplished by leaving the reg pressurized over night and then re-tuning.)

In contrast, if you adjust the orifice to the point where the freeflow stops, and then tune to the minimum spec of 1.4" of water, you end up going a lot farther in than 1/12th of a turn and every degree past that point is just lost performance with no gain in "safety" or freeflow resistance.

So why have cool break in equipment if you tune the regs in a manner that makes it meaningless anyway? It sounds good, but accomplishes absolutely nothing - except sounding good.

You are also still missing the point that things happen and that the first few dives after an annual service are high risk in terms of discovering something wrong with your reg. The FAA licensed aircraft mechanics who have worked on the planes I have flown over the last 25 years have all been trained to a MUCH higher standard standard than is required of any reg tech, yet over the years I have been given just annual inspected aircraft that in one case (a V35 Bonanza) had the aileron cables were reversed (caught that during a control check just prior to what would have been a very interesting and probably short flight), and in another case found a tool left on top of an oil cooler in the left engine of a Seneca II, after an unscheduled landing following a precautionary engine shutdown when the oil pressure dropped due to a hole worn in the top of the oil cooler.

Bad days get had, mistakes get made and in the case of reg techs - many of them can read the manual and do a good job of monkey see monkey do and even get the reg adjusted to spec, but many still have little more than a basic understanding of how regs work. So when something really odd is encountered, the "fix" that gets done is often not the right one, or is not extensive enough, or is not even made at all as the reg is still within the current very crappy manufacturer specs.

Consequently, a pool or quarry dive after an annual service and before the $2000 trip, is still a good idea as it is the diver's money, the diver's life and the diver's ultimate responsibility to determine that his or her equipment is safe and functioning properly.

 

[ReefHound]

Phil, I would bet the majority of divers drop off their regs at the LDS (or mail them off), then pick them up when they get a call that they are ready, and don't even know WHO did the work much less have reason to put complete TRUST in their work.

I think a better analogy than checking the plug after an oil change would be checking the lugs after a tire rotation. You bet I do that, a failure can lead to an accident. I don't see a checkout dive as all that much of a problem. I don't really go out of my way. I have several regs and I'll check out the newly serviced one on the next shallow dive opportunity.

To the other guy, I don't think there is anything wrong with my dive planning. I'm confident that I could handle a reg failure but I'd still rather minimize the likelihood of it happening on a 120' dive.

 

[PhilEllis]

Phil, no offense, but 1.4" to 1.6" of water is poor performance when compared to the 1.0" to 1.2" of water performace that used to be standard with a comparable entry level non balanced, non adjustable second stage like the Scubapro High Performance (R108) over 30 years ago. As an example, in the early to mid 1980's a well tuned R108 breathed as well at high tank pressures as a well tuned Balanced Adjustable (R156) or G250. The difference between the two was only noticeable at lower tank pressures on less expensive unbalanced first stages.

Part of the problem is that industry wide, reg quality has gotten worse (more plastic parts, plastic orifices, etc.) but a l;arge part of the problem is the idea that inexpensive second stages need not perform well and that better inhalation performance comes with a higher price tag. The end result has been acceptance of breathe like a rock specs that shops and techs fear to depart from for liability reasons and that companies maintain primarily to create an incentive to upgrade to more expensive regulators. You demonstrate that very nicely when you state "I don't think it is safe and fair to the consumer to engage in the business of making a regulator perform better than it was intended.". Oddly, I don't hear customers saying "Well...gosh when you put it that way I sure wish you'd tune my reg to perform crappier like it was intended to do."

I'm really glad you have the equipment to do most of the break in of your seats before the reg leaves the shop. It's a waste of effort and quality equipment though if you do not tune them to take advantage of it.

For example, the general pre seat break-in equipment standard was to use a "12 to 1" approach where the orifice is adjusted until no freeflow occurs, then turn the orifice in 1/12th of a turn farther in to anticipate the eventual effect of the formation of a seating groove. This was then cross checked with an inhalation test to ensure that the resulting inhalation effort was not so low as to cause a freeflow between inhalations due to CGF issues (normally about 1.0 of water on a second stage of standard case design). 99.9% of the time this is enough to prevent any freeflow once the seating groove forms. (As an aside, even without a machine to break in the seat, much of the same break in effect can be accomplished by leaving the reg pressurized over night and then re-tuning.)

In contrast, if you adjust the orifice to the point where the freeflow stops, and then tune to the minimum spec of 1.4" of water, you end up going a lot farther in than 1/12th of a turn and every degree past that point is just lost performance with no gain in "safety" or freeflow resistance.

So why have cool break in equipment if you tune the regs in a manner that makes it meaningless anyway? It sounds good, but accomplishes absolutely nothing - except sounding good.

I stand corrected.

Phil Ellis

 

[redacted]

That is truely a shame. When I get my oil changed in my automobile, I know to a reasonable certainty that the drain plug is installed properly. That doesn't mean that the drain plug is ALWAYS installed correctly, but that it is so nearly always done correctly that I don't have to design a plan to check up after the service guy.

Only in the scuba business would we allow unqualified or completely ignorant service people to service our regulators. The point I was trying to make is that if you take a regulator to a QUALIFIED regulator technician, you can KNOW it was done correctly with about the same statistical certainty that you have with your motor oil drain plug. There is no adjustment needed after the seat has broken in....that is supposed to be done as part of the service you pay for.

Note: This is not a criticism of self rebuilding. In fact, I am one of the leading advocates that you be allowed to buy parts and do the service yourself. This criticism is of those who practice regulator rebuilding as a profession without REALLY knowing what they are doing or without possession of the proper equipment to test the product after service.

Phil Ellis

Heck - only in the scuba business does the customer think that getting a 1 hour service done in "only" a week is great.

Our problem is this idea of a QUALIFED reg tech. For most mfgrs, this means he works in an authorized dealer shop and has attended a day or 2 of training. Any mechanical ability is a pleasant coincidence and any true mechanical understanding is often just too much to expect. I'm sure this is not what Phil means when he uses that term.

As a DIYer, I don't have access to most of the TMDE that a professional shop should have. So my break-in of a new HP seat is sit there for 5 minutes taping the purge. Even then I set the IP a little low (125 - 130) expecting it to take a bit more of a set. LP seats are left unpressurized over-night and then tuned as aggressively as I can using a bathroom sink. A "test drive" in my pool or local lake is too easy to pass up but, I agree, mostly unnecessary. A little touch up of the 2nd stage cracking pressure is not unusual after a bit of use just to make sure I'm getting all the performance potential they offer. I always check IP and cracking pressure before any major trip. I will sometimes make a minor adjustment to cracking pressure before packing them for travel. If IP is not satisfactory or some other problem show-up, that reg goes back in the stable and another will make the trip in its place.

 

[Luis H]

I think you guys are missing my point.............

If you service a regulator CORRECTLY, you don't have a problem. End of question.


Phil Ellis

Just the implication that you believe that no mistakes could happen when you deliver a serviced regulator makes me very concern about your quality control.

One more check should never be a concerned if you are really that confident. It should be encouraged.


I also agree with DA Aqua Master about optimizing regulator performance and not just settling for good enough. That is why I do my own service. IMHO, a regulator with a cracking suction of 1.4 to 1.6 inWC basically belongs in rentals…maybe.

 

[halocline]

On the issue of soft seat break-in, that is done here IN OUR STORE. We create 85% of any seat demarcation right here in the store BEFORE we adjust and test the regulator.

Phil, how do you break in the seats? Do you use something like the peterbuilt tool that cycles the regs?

 

[jeckyll]

...
To the other guy, I don't think there is anything wrong with my dive planning. I'm confident that I could handle a reg failure but I'd still rather minimize the likelihood of it happening on a 120' dive.

I'm assuming you meant my post.

Did you read what I wrote?

"... any perceived need to _significantly_ change the dive planning for a 'normal' conservative dive ..."

You consider a dive to 120' part of a normal conservative dive post reg service?

I mean if are just trying to start an argument, that's fine, I won't waste my time, but please don't intentionally try to misrepresent something I wrote.

As well, I didn't quote you when I said it, my response was in the thread with regards to all posts (including the OP).

 

[ReefHound]

I mean if are just trying to start an argument, that's fine, I won't waste my time, but please don't intentionally try to misrepresent something I wrote.

Of course not, apparently I just misunderstood what you wrote. I thought you were saying there was no need to change the dive plan to a "conservative" one. I thought you were saying anything within recreational limits should be good enough since you should be able to handle any malfunctions.

Who said anything about changing a "conservative" dive plan? What exactly does that mean anyway? Making it "more conservative"?

 

[PhilEllis]

Just the implication that you believe that no mistakes could happen when you deliver a serviced regulator makes me very concern about your quality control.

One more check should never be a concerned if you are really that confident. It should be encouraged.


I also agree with DA Aqua Master about optimizing regulator performance and not just settling for good enough. That is why I do my own service. IMHO, a regulator with a cracking suction of 1.4 to 1.6 inWC basically belongs in rentals…maybe.

You know, this discussion is amazing...............

The original poster asked a question as to what level of CUSTOMER testing was necessary after getting a regulator back from service. I guess I assumed that he was talking about purchasing service from a qualified, skilled regulator repair technician. My response was a proper one. If you get it done from an authorized dealer that is PROPERLY servicing the regulator, it should be ready to go. I didn't vouch for how others do it...I simply said it SHOULD be ready to go IF the technician followed proper cleaning, assembly, AND TESTING procedures. I don't think there is anything wrong with the customer doing an additional test, I simply said it was not NECESSARY if the rebuild or service is done properly and tested properly afterwards. I don't think I said anything that should make you concerned about MY quality control. My quality control is GOOD....that is why you don't need to do anything else. If you send a regulator to my repair shop for an annual rebuild, it will come back to you working properly....no adjustments will be necessary, no additional testing will be necessary, you can take it diving on a vacation and it will work properly. How is that a bad reflection on our quality control?

On the issue of opening effort, please remember that I don't build the regulators, I service them. If the manufacturer builds a regulator and says that the optimal opening effort should be set at 1.4 inches of water, I take them at their word. Can I make an entry level regulator perform better? You bet. But the likelyhood that it will free flow more easily than the customer would like if very high. Better designed regulators can be adjusted much easier to breathe.

Luis, I agree with you that a regulator that requires 1.4 inches of water effort to open is a hard breathing regulator. I personally would buy a better one. But that is not the discussion. The discussion was about proper servicing and testing of a regulator. I simply stated that we set regulators to the specifications outlined by the manufacturer....including static opening effort.

Luis, we have a professional regulator repair service here in our store. Why is it bad to say we service them properly and you can take them diving when you get them back? You are free to do a test dive if you want to, but it is not necessary. We test them properly before we return them to a customers. That is not an indication of poor quality control.....it is quite the opposite.

Phil Ellis