The great independents versus isolation manifold debate

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!

Peo once bubbled...


One seldom heard but very important reason to not dive doubles is that it screws up your gas planning.

Sorry, but this is complete crap.

Diving with manifolded doubles, you use 1/3 of your gas going out, 1/3 back, and 1/3 is kept in reserve.

Diving independant doubles you breath 1/3 of each tank out, 1/3 back, and 1/3 of each tank is kept as reserve. Obviously you need to swap regs to do this.

Gas usage, and reserves are exactly the same.

Indeed, manifolded doubles have a single point of failure (isolator O-ring), so are considered less safe as a single O-ring failure can lead to you loosing all your gas. With independants, no SINGLE failure can cause a loss of gas which would prevent you finishing the dive.

Se7en
 
To my opinion, two single tanks r safer to use than two tanks connected with manifold. This is simple, u have two separated independent systems. If one of the systems goes down even if u do nothing u will still have one complete system to finish the dive safely. When diving with manifold u have two systems that function as one. If u have problem with one of the systems u have to close the manifold. Until u closed it u will continue loosing air from both systems. This can b avoided if u dive with closed isolator and open it only if there is a problem with one of the systems.

The advantage of diving with manifold is that u don’t have to change regs during the dive. To my opinion it’s the only one. On the second hand when u r changing regs during the dive u have better reference to the air consumption during the dive.

U don’t screw up nothing by using to different tanks, u breath 1/3 from the first tank, 2/3 from the second tank and go back to the first one.

To the question manifold or not, it depends how u use it, When im using a manifold im diving with it closed, so its like two different systems. But most of the time I use singles.

I don’t believe in telling that it is right or wrong diving with manifold. There r advantages and disadvantages to both configurations

Every tek diver should make his own decision about his diving configuration and decide what is the safest configuration for him. I believe I gave the main differences between the systems, from this point its up to the diver.

Mark
 
It's surprising to see support for separate cylinders and regs all on this board...I was starting to think I was the only one here who dove this configuration.

I have to agree with the "gas management" problem being complete crap. A pointed out above, it does technically increase task loading and requires switching regs, but then you have to be realistic and understand that all divers should be constantly aware of gas supply and that all that is added is switching a reg near the mid point of the dive and again toward the end of the dive. If you can't handle that kind of really minor task loading you really should not go in the water.

A manifold does potentially allow you to access all of your air in the event one reg fails but it also requires you be able to shut the offending reg off in a timely fashion or else you risk losing all your remaining air in short order. (you'd be amazed how fast a modern high performance reg will dump air in a full fledged free flow.) An isolator valve adds another level of saftey in being able to isolate your tanks to what is in effect separate tanks and regs should a valve, neck o-ring or burst disc fail. But at the same time, it also adds another failure point with the result that tech divers as a whole can't completely agree on whether an isolator valve is a good idea.

In my opinion, an advantage of separate cylinders and regs is that with proper gas management no action is required to ensure you have adequate gas to reach the surface from any point in the dive. On the negative side you potentially lose the availablility of some gas when a failure occurs, but with proper management, it's gas you don't need. On the plus side, you get the advantages of an isolator valve without the additonal failure point or the absolute need to shut off a valve following a failure. You also get the advantage of being able to dive a familiar configuration when traveling, and I have never found a shop (outside of one doing tech training) that rents manifolded doubles.

And realistically if you properly fill and maintain your tanks and valves are not scootering through caves, the most likely failure you will experience will either be a minor slow leak that most divers would not even notice or it will be a frozen and violently free flowing first stage, that can be resolved by shutting the tank valve for a minute or two with either a manifold or separate tanks and regs.

You also don't see many people bashing cave divers who side mount their tanks which is functionally the same as a separate cylinder and reg independent doubles setup from an air management standpoint. It's just a matter of the advantages of a particular configuration out weighing the disadvantages in your specific type of diving. A lot of divers are opposed to independent doubles based solely on the philospohy of their training agency rather than on an open minded assessment of whether they may be approriate for a specific diving situation.

.
 
Se7en once bubbled...
Indeed, manifolded doubles have a single point of failure (isolator O-ring)...
No, an o-ring failure around the stem of the valve will only cause the loss of half your gas. Once closed, the seat isolates one cylinder from the stem o-ring.

Roak
 
roakey once bubbled...

Once closed, the seat isolates one cylinder from the stem o-ring.
Roak

I believe there are some isolators where this is not true, but agree that in general it is, and it's a poor design where it is not.

Having never seen a stem Oring failure, what is the gass loss rate likely to be? How much gas do you loose before you can get the isolator shut down, knowing that once you have it shut down, you then loose 1/2 your remaining gas at that point?

Se7en
 
How do you fasten the set of non manifolded tanks to your BC. Do you still use a tank band to joint the tanks together, then fasten it to your BC. Or do you have some method of strapping two singles onto a BC that allows you to use the tank in both twin and single configuration. If the latter is the case, do you have a make and model number of said tank harness? Or should I just go to the workshop and start cutting and welding something of my own design?
 
whether you have a manifold or not really makes no differenct to the way you connect the tanks to your bc/harness, if anything it is all more forgiving without the manifold as you dont have to make it so the tanks line up perfectly from top to bottom of your tanks..
If you are handy enough making them is easy... i have just made a really travel friendly pair made of webbing...( i believe it is similar to that of a type of alpha band)... looks good and is as strong as anything (and light)
i thought this post would come up with mixed reactions

Scotty:confused:
 
U mount the tanks the same way u mount a single tank, just use longer straps and two tanks(or three).
:)
 
pt40fathoms once bubbled...
How do you fasten the set of non manifolded tanks to your BC. Do you still use a tank band to joint the tanks together, then fasten it to your BC. Or do you have some method of strapping two singles onto a BC that allows you to use the tank in both twin and single configuration.

You could make your own and some of the pictures on the following links should give you osme good ideas. I just bought a set and spent the time saved diving. But I would not under any circumstances just use a longer cam strap to go around a pair of tanks. It's a bad idea as it is not secure and is potentially unstable.

Dive rite makes a set of travel bands...

http://www.diverite.com/products/gas/ind_dbl.htm

OMS also sells travel bands that are also very simple and rugged...

http://www.omsdive.com/softband.html

Aqua explorers also makes a set that are in my opinion better designed and more durable than the Dive Rite bands and easier to use than the OMS bands. They also offer the advantage of being able to be used with either a backplate and wings or with a standard BC. Although with some BC's the existing strap cannot be removed from the BC or hard pack and the dnagling strap then potentially becomes an entanglement hazard.

http://www.discountdivers.com/fx/aqua.explorers.tank.bands.html

You can also just use a standard set of tank bands although changing tanks then requires a wrench and/or a separate set of bands for each pair of tanks.

A single tank should be used with a single tank adapter designed for your backplate.
 
"But I would not under any circumstances just use a longer cam strap to go around a pair of tanks. It's a bad idea as it is not secure and is potentially unstable."

Ciao DA Aquamaster,
your post on indipendent doubles was the best post on the subject I've ever read. Here in Europe they're still popular in the cave diving community although some divers are turning hogarthian.
I believe most detractors or naysayers never really used it long enough for the reg switching to become a second nature.

It is your statement above that puzzles me, did you really try it? I've used long cam bands for 13 years to hold 10+10, 12+12, 15+15 and 20+20 liter tanks with no problem whatsoever; yes, two bands, one doesn't do the job properly. I've used them also for the heavier (but manifolded) american steel doubles and for indipendent 80+80cf with no problem.
All the above without metal backplates.
It is indeed a lightweight configuration when facing the weight restrictions of air travelling.
The only real risk is tank slipping, if the bands are not tight enough and the talks have a slippery paint.
Please note that I'm not saying that those twin short band systems aren't as good or even better, I'm just saying that the big bands always worked very well for me.
Just my experience.
 
http://cavediveflorida.com/Rum_House.htm

Back
Top Bottom