|
Post by technidiver on Jan 1, 2019 19:46:51 GMT -8
Over the years there's been a lot of interesting tank setups and I've always wondered about using an extremely high capacity sized tank setup for technical diving or for savage work.
Is it economic or even practical to use double 100s as a tank setup?
The diameter is 8inches and bands are made for 8inch tanks, would you need a different manifold or would any manifold work?
TF
|
|
|
Post by technidiver on Jan 1, 2019 19:47:20 GMT -8
Also, the weight of each tank is roughly 45 pounds. So it would be 90 pounds out of water.
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jan 2, 2019 9:02:31 GMT -8
I think it is do-able. But why? I believe that our LDS had a set of double 100s for a while, then broke them down. It was set up with a backplate, and had a double-post manifold, but without a center post. There is a manifold built for this setup, but it does not take into consideration a double hose regulator with a center post.
This is about equivalent to the U.S. Navy twin 90s of the 1960s and 1970s, before the current aluminum tanks were available. They had a regular USD center-post manifold, but were also quite large in diameter.
John
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Jan 2, 2019 9:05:00 GMT -8
Hey gang, I think TD is trapped, he's snowed in, and delirious too... Don't worry buddy, I've sent word to Sergeant Preston: it might take a while though; he's coming from the Yukon! Yes, I've seen images of Scubapro twin 100's: sounds like a good recipe for blowing out your lumbar though Jaybird
|
|
|
Post by technidiver on Jan 2, 2019 9:53:22 GMT -8
Hey gang, I think TD is trapped, he's snowed in, and delirious too... Don't worry buddy, I've sent word to Sergeant Preston: it might take a while though; he's coming from the Yukon! Yes, I've seen images of Scubapro twin 100's: sounds like a good recipe for blowing out your lumbar though Jaybird Well, the reason why I'm asking about such large tanks is for my house. Pffffff, not for diving. As you can see I'm very oxygen deprived and delirious. I think I'd rather stay with double 80s. Now I see why there's no need for 100s, other than to provide air for a whole house.
|
|
|
Post by technidiver on Jan 2, 2019 9:55:20 GMT -8
I think it is do-able. But why? I believe that our LDS had a set of double 100s for a while, then broke them down. It was set up with a backplate, and had a double-post manifold, but without a center post. There is a manifold built for this setup, but it does not take into consideration a double hose regulator with a center post. This is about equivalent to the U.S. Navy twin 90s of the 1960s and 1970s, before the current aluminum tanks were available. They had a regular USD center-post manifold, but were also quite large in diameter. John If I couldn't have a Center post for the Double 100s, then I'm out of luck! I'd like to dive doubles with a Center post for a Double Hose and have the top right post be for a backup, just so the LDS doesn't lose their sh*t on me! On the contrary, what about Double 50s? TD
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Jan 2, 2019 11:23:39 GMT -8
On the contrary, what about Double 50s? TD Yeah, you can also do 38's and I think 42's, forty-somethings anyway? The 38's you'll need a 1/2" nipple though... If you do twin-72's I don't think you'd need to play with your trim like you will with the others either: John, is that correct? Jaybird
|
|
|
Post by technidiver on Jan 2, 2019 14:12:32 GMT -8
On the contrary, what about Double 50s? TD Yeah, you can also do 38's and I think 42's, forty-somethings anyway? The 38's you'll need a 1/2" nipple though... If you do twin-72's I don't think you'd need to play with your trim like you will with the others either: John, is that correct? Jaybird I wanna have a decent set of doubles that will work with the Sherwood manifold that I bought off eBay not too long ago. To me, doubles (smaller doubles) offer better characteristics in the water. Weighting with a single Alu 80 is always an issue. It really depends on the situation and there is latitude for changing it up. Double 50s or double 63 Aluminum tanks is the size I'm eyeing up. I would go for the Double 38s, but since it's 1/2 it won't be compatible with the Sherwood manifold. TD Steel 72s are also an option too, if I can source some cheaper tanks
|
|
|
Post by technidiver on Jan 2, 2019 15:28:17 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Jan 2, 2019 15:56:16 GMT -8
I could be remembering this wrong, so someone correct me (nicely!!!!) if I am. I think it was Jim Steele's son who was telling me those larger capacity steel tank are negatively-buoyant: he absolutely hated using them and kept causing him to roll to one side. I want to say he was using a 90-CF and it was scary!
You should be able to find a coupla 72 fer a good price as people think they're too old fashioned for their modern gear: ask yer LDS...
JB
|
|
|
Post by vance on Jan 2, 2019 16:43:20 GMT -8
Da-Zam, TD! One steel 72 is more than enough for me when walking up and back from the beach! They're neutral in the water, and I still need 30 lbs on the weightbelt. I thought about double 72s once, then I woke up!
You youngsters can hack it, I 'spose.
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jan 2, 2019 16:49:34 GMT -8
I think the question to ask is what amount of air do you need. The double steel 80s would work, and it looks like the bands are the same as for an AL80. But weight is heavier than either the twin 72s or the twin 50s. Usually twin 72s, twin 80s and twin 100s are used in tech diving to do deep, decompression dives. I used for years twin 50s, and they have very nice buoyancy characteristics. I retired them about three years ago, simply because of the sustained pressure cracking issues that this alloy of AL has. I still have those cylinders, but they are under zero pressure, and have been replaced with my twin 58 cubic feet, 1800 psig tanks (which have a buoyancy characteristic that necessitates six pounds of weight to be the same as my twin AL 50s). Since I'm not currently diving these tanks, and have replaced them, I would consider selling them. They will need both a hydro and an eddie current test. I just picked up a set of twin AL 40s, which are really slim and nice in the water. My LDS has a set of these tanks which they are selling for pretty cheap too. John
|
|
|
Post by tomcatpc on Jan 2, 2019 16:54:56 GMT -8
Twin 100's...Dude, that's hardcore!!! Mark
|
|
|
Post by tomcatpc on Jan 2, 2019 16:57:13 GMT -8
I have a set of 1969 US Divers twin 72's that I have yet to dive. Just never got around to hauling them out of the basement...LOL. Plus I am just so content and used to a steel 72 with the shallow "Soul Diving" I love diving. But, I still want to dive doubles this Summer. I'd love to have a set of 38, 42, or 50's someday though. Mark
|
|
|
Post by technidiver on Jan 2, 2019 18:36:08 GMT -8
I could be remembering this wrong, so someone correct me (nicely!!!!) if I am. I think it was Jim Steele's son who was telling me those larger capacity steel tank are negatively-buoyant: he absolutely hated using them and kept causing him to roll to one side. I want to say he was using a 90-CF and it was scary! You should be able to find a coupla 72 fer a good price as people think they're too old fashioned for their modern gear: ask yer LDS... JB I'll check with my LDS or try searching locally before going to ebait for tanks! TD
|
|