Re: Luxfer says O2 > 23,5% needs O2 cleaning


Outer Bamnks diving on the Great Escape Southern California Live-Aboard Dive Boat

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Kendall Raine on November 10, 2004 at 16:15:07:

In Reply to: Re: Luxfer says O2 > 23,5% needs O2 cleaning posted by Chris on November 10, 2004 at 13:04:00:

I guess I don't see it as quite so black and white. The advantages of various systems go beyond not having to have an O2 clean tank.

Systems based on denitrogenating air will still be attractive inasmuch as there is no need to PP blend. No PP, no need for 100%. Lower hassle. Lower fire risk. Maybe even lower insurance premiums. Nah, forget that one. As now, they'll only be economic for bulk fill applications.

Entrainment systems may lose some attractiveness because with those you're still handling pure O2 but can no longer pump pre-mix into any old dirty tank. Then again, you weren't supposed to put anything over 21% into a tank that wasn't at least O2 compatible.

The thing about O2 cleaning is that something clean stays clean as long as it doesn't touch something dirty. Cleaning up front isn't a big deal to do.

Where the issue matters is with people who are too lazy or cheap to get their tanks cleaned in the first place or want to constantly top off their nitrox with dirty air fills. Those people can still get a 40% fill provided their tank was clean sometime in the last year-they'll have a sticker. The operator won't know if or when the tank got dirty, particularly if the tank is brought in empty for refill.


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]