|
Post by nikeajax on Dec 19, 2023 15:48:04 GMT -8
Pabloo, dziękujemy za opublikowanie zdjęć, pomogły ożywić Twój sprzęt! Thank you for posting the photos, they helped bring your gear to life!JB
|
|
|
Post by pabloo on Dec 20, 2023 10:26:09 GMT -8
Hello JB Thank you for your support and warm welcome from everyone... I also appreciate your translation into Polish Pawel
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Dec 20, 2023 10:52:28 GMT -8
Pabloo,
Thank you for the photos and diagrams! I like what you've done with the regulator. That Kaiman R7 regulator is only the second downstream single stage I've known about. The first was the Voit Viking 40 Fathom regulator.
John
Pablo,
Dziękujemy za zdjęcia i schematy! Podoba mi się to, co zrobiłeś z regulatorem. Ten regulator Kaiman R7 to dopiero drugi pojedynczy stopień, o którym wiem. Pierwszym był regulator Voit Viking 40 Fathom.
Jan
|
|
|
Post by pabloo on Dec 20, 2023 11:24:08 GMT -8
You have right JB...we should be a little crazy in our life in positive meaning to do something interesting & exiting. Something like useless set chest mounted vintage DH regulator What for if you can buy beauty new, modern hi-tec regulator or any other scuba equipment...what is the reason to waste time for that I think is that FEELING when you making it yourself, it's imagine transformed in to reality like inventors before. Most of current constructions like fins, masks, suits, tanks, valves, regulators...are just development of old ideas with modern technology and materials. Show me now something so genius like Dacor Nautilius CVS...BCD jacket, wing or hybrid are just inflated balons with cordura covers nothing else. Pawel
|
|
|
Post by pabloo on Dec 20, 2023 13:01:26 GMT -8
Pabloo, Thank you for the photos and diagrams! I like what you've done with the regulator. That Kaiman R7 regulator is only the second downstream single stage I've known about. The first was the Voit Viking 40 Fathom regulator. John Pablo, Dziękujemy za zdjęcia i schematy! Podoba mi się to, co zrobiłeś z regulatorem. Ten regulator Kaiman R7 to dopiero drugi pojedynczy stopień, o którym wiem. Pierwszym był regulator Voit Viking 40 Fathom. Jan Hello John The Kaiman R-7 was developed by eng. Lech Suchy in 68'-69' as experimental equipment to replace the two-stage MORS regulator and eliminate it's problems. The Kajman single-stage diaphragm automat was designed with several features such as: parallel-running unloaded reduction stage, tunable venturi with support and adjustable main spring tension. It was relatively unusual for single-stage reducers that time...is commonly used normal for the first and second stage of today's one-hose reducers. The Kajman was intended for use at depths up to 40 m but was also tested up to 60 m (?) by Navy with the additional air tanks. Regarding to its usability and reliability of construction, it was used by the Navy and Army until the mid-1980s , replaced by modern, single hose UAN-82 regulator. About the constructor Eng. Leszek Suchy... In 1957 Mr Suchy designed his first diving apparatus ... From 1959, Eng. Leszek Suchy was an active member of the Scientific Underwater Research Club at the Faculty of Fisheries at the University of Agriculture in Olsztyn. In 1968, he was a "safety diver" in the Polish Bathinautical experiment MEDUZA. But he was mostly known as the constructor of the legendary Polish diving regulators R-7 "Kajman" and R-8 "Marlin" produced until 1980 by Precision Engineering Manufacturer in Gdańsk. These with red tags have a serial number and the description "Made in Poland". They were intended for civilian use and for export, so they have a nice looking shiny chrome finish. These without tags with a matte finish were used by Navy and Army divers - they only have serial numbers and the "MW" (Navy) stamp from Navy Training & Diving Center. The internal construction was the same. If you are interesting of that there is a link to article on TheScubamuseum www.thescubamuseum.com/regulatorsother/KAIMANpictures.htmand pdf restoration manual ... made by gentelman from US:) www.tauchhistorie.eu/th14/kajman/kaiman-regulator-rebuild-johnson-2010.pdfI also made an article for Luigi Fabri from BluTimeScubaHistory about history of production diving apparatus in Poland which is mostly unknown but interesting part of scuba history from other side of World I can send it to you or make new thread on the site for all users - is this good idea? Please, let me know what you are thinking about that. Pawel
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Dec 20, 2023 15:02:00 GMT -8
Paweł, wielkie dzięki za lekcję historii! R-8 przypomina mi amerykański regulator, skąd pochodzi John w Oregonie: Paweł, thanks for the history lesson! The R-8 reminds me of an American regulator where John is from, Oregon:Pochodzi z połowy lat 60-tych. It's from the mid-1960's.Pozdrowienia sezonowe, przyjacielu! Jak to mówią w Norwegii: Dobry Jul! Seasons greetings my friend! As they say in Norway, God Jul! (Good Yule!)JB
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Dec 20, 2023 18:52:05 GMT -8
Paweł, wielkie dzięki za lekcję historii! R-8 przypomina mi amerykański regulator, skąd pochodzi John w Oregonie: Paweł, thanks for the history lesson! The R-8 reminds me of an American regulator where John is from, Oregon:Pochodzi z połowy lat 60-tych. It's from the mid-1960's.Pozdrowienia sezonowe, przyjacielu! Jak to mówią w Norwegii: Dobry Jul! Seasons greetings my friend! As they say in Norway, God Jul! (Good Yule!)JB JB, My Local Dive Shop has one of these regulators in a display case. I have later models of he White Stag single hose regulators. Here's a BCD that is a hard-case, which Pabloo may enjoy seeing too. White Stage Manual BC-1 by John Ratliff, on Flickr This BCD is a hard shell that has small holes in the bottom. It will hold air in the normal position for diving, but if the diver surface dives, the small holes will allow a small amout of air out the bottom of the shell on each side. This design does not require a regulator to regulator interior pressure, as the pressure is open to the water and will assume the exact same pressure inside as outside in the water. Therefore, there is no hazard of implosion with this unit. But, as the diver descends, (s)he will again have to add air to the unit. This unit originally did not have a power inflator, and required only oral inflation. I've added an inflator to mine, and it works both ways. White Stag Hard Shell U:W front view by John Ratliff, on Flickr Here is the White Stag Hard Shell BCD in use. Since I am using a back-mount BCD, I included wearing a White Stag vest too, for emergency use. I have long advocated the use of vest designs, even when using a back-mounted BCD (I used to have a wet suit where the whole back was the BCD). Here is the Dacor Nautilus CVS (Constant Volume System), one of two that I own. IMG_2796 by John Ratliff, on Flickr Nautilus CVS Regulator breakdown by John Ratliff, on Flickr This is the Nautilus CVS regulator parts diagram. John
|
|
|
Post by spirou on Apr 8, 2024 7:50:03 GMT -8
Hello John I found somewhere "chart" comparing two hose with single hose breathing resistance. I put extra label "chest mounted double hose" . The reg is (should be) directly on the chest and the mouthpiece also can be close to exhaust valve level. I am not a diving physiologist but "harder exhalation" makes me less fatigue than "harder inhalation"... I thing that for breathing muscles is easier "compress" than "suck" the chest under water - am I right ? The regulator with normal (backside) mount regulation was very sensitive and easy makes "air blows" - with tuning works better. After my set testing breathing is very similar on every position with "positive pressure" inhalation during diver's horizontal position. So even simple (unbalanced , without suppor) vintage double hose regulator can be "nice breathing" machine when is "chest mounted" Regards Pawel I practice few time the exercise of swimming with the bottle hanging in front. I must say that I disliked this feeling of having the regulator who push always air in my mouth. I can also feel the variation of inhalation pressure. Some of the scaphandre of diver of the calypso had the regulator placed like that, but I think that it was a second stage chest mount. Cheer's Fred
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Apr 8, 2024 8:25:26 GMT -8
Interesting setup John, did you eventually figure out the LP problem you mentioned? TD No, after the dive went badly, I abandoned the idea. ('Had an inadvertent drop of the Nautilus CVS's weights, and had to contend with too many things at one time.) I may take it up again, but that would be this coming summer. John
|
|
|
Post by pabloo on Apr 8, 2024 9:51:23 GMT -8
Hello John I found somewhere "chart" comparing two hose with single hose breathing resistance. I put extra label "chest mounted double hose" . The reg is (should be) directly on the chest and the mouthpiece also can be close to exhaust valve level. I am not a diving physiologist but "harder exhalation" makes me less fatigue than "harder inhalation"... I thing that for breathing muscles is easier "compress" than "suck" the chest under water - am I right ? The regulator with normal (backside) mount regulation was very sensitive and easy makes "air blows" - with tuning works better. After my set testing breathing is very similar on every position with "positive pressure" inhalation during diver's horizontal position. So even simple (unbalanced , without suppor) vintage double hose regulator can be "nice breathing" machine when is "chest mounted" Regards Pawel I practice few time the exercise of swimming with the bottle hanging in front. I must say that I disliked this feeling of having the regulator who push always air in my mouth. I can also feel the variation of inhalation pressure. Some of the scaphandre of diver of the calypso had the regulator placed like that, but I think that it was a second stage chest mount. Cheer's Fred Hi Fred Yes, with "normal" regulation it's not comfortable I agree with you for 100%... especially uncontrolled blows were very annoying. Fortunately, the Kaiman has adjusting tension of opening valve lever also Venturi nozzle regulation. The point is about "opening tension force" which is different between chest and back mounted regulator. It took me time and nerves :opening the reg's can, turn the lever nut a little, nozzle to minimum,closing reg's can, go to water for check...and repeat Finally, I found the proper lever tension and Venturi nozzle position so it's giving the air "light as a feather" without uncontrolled blows on the diver's prone position. In the vertical head up/down position breathing is "normal" as you have regulator back mounted, only on reverse prone position inhale is little harder but still ok. imgur.com/a/nLUQb1aI like chest mounted double hoses Regards Pawel
|
|
|
Post by spirou on Apr 8, 2024 10:34:27 GMT -8
Hello Pawel,
Yes it through if the regulator is well adjusted for his new position, the inhalation must be very comfortable.😃
I try to found photos of the inside of the scaphandre use sometimes on the calypso. I think post a photo where we could see the routing of the hose coming from the tank 😉
Cheer's
Fred
|
|
cg43
Senior Diver
Posts: 90
|
Post by cg43 on Apr 9, 2024 6:53:15 GMT -8
Hello Pawel
Today I was diving and made some breathing attempts .
I stand vertical and raised my head so that there was the max. distance between the diaphragm of my singelhose regulator and my own diaphragm .
First I inhaled with my own diaphragm . Inhale was not bad but I could feel resistance . As soon as I relaxed my diaphragm I was blown out by the waterpressure moderate quick . The distanze between the two diaphragms was something about 45 cm
Second I breath with the tip of my lung . The inhale was easy and relaxing showed a smouth automatic exhale . The distance between the two diaphragms now was something about 20 cm .
To come back to the drawing : For me this is only a very rough approximation model . The differences in the breathing can produce different breathing centers . And what model do we use for the diver ? If we have a flexibel bag filled with air submerged in water the pressure inside is equal the lowest point in the water . If we have a rigid body closed with a flexibel membran the pressure inside is equal to the pressure of the center of the membrane . Neither fits the diver . If the diver do not breath for every point of his breathnig system applies :
SUM of all forces together is Zero We have variable forces for any point : elastic forces diver ( ribcase , diaphragm , usw. ) elastic forces gear ( suit , belts , BCD , usw. ) human variable muskular forces diver force from the water colum outsise the diver And at last the constant airpressure inside the diver . If the diver is connected to a breathing aparat both are the same .
That's a lot of unknown forces . Consequence : You have to try what fits you best .
Greetings Rainer
|
|
|
Post by pabloo on Apr 9, 2024 12:01:12 GMT -8
Hi Rainer I like your experiment and a phrase "my own diaphragm". Lets make mental shortcut ... if we omit which part of the lungs we breathe with the closer the regulator's membrane is to the center of "our membrane", the "better" is our breathing fillings. Using double hoses regulator - that is the subject of this thread, we have opportunity to positioned it as close as possible to our membrane...on our back, between shoulder blades or on the chest. On vertical position characteristic is similar with back or chest mount but we are mostly diving on horizontal prone so that is important. When we have reg classical back mounted "we have what we have" depending on the efficiency of the regulator. But when we put same regulator on the chest position we have additional "positive water pressure" factor which we can use (by tuning) for increasing regulator's inhalation characteristics. That is why I like chest mounted double hoses Regards Pawel
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Apr 9, 2024 18:12:04 GMT -8
I have gone against the recommendations a bit in the past, and put my Trieste II regulator onto a tank mounted on the Dacor Nautilus CVS (Constant Volume System). This places the regulator at least 2 inches further away from my human diaphragm (membrane). But, I did not experience a lot of problems with that configuration, as the Trieste II (highly modified) has a wonderful Venturi. The main problem with a really good-functioning double hose regulator is breaking effort. That was slightly greater, but once flow was established with this regulator, breathing was easy, even though not ideally located in relationship to my body. One of the advantages is that I could take the unit off in the water, and the Nautilus CVS would float the Trieste II above the water line, so it did not free flow. Nautilus floating with Trieste II-a by John Ratliff, on Flickr Here is one of the more unusual configurations of a double hose regulator, a Mistral in this case. When the U.S. AIr Force Air Rescue Service became the Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Service, in the very early 1960s, the reason was to recover Air Force and NASA satallite information in the ocean, as well as once the manned spacecrafet program got going, recover the astronauts if they somehow ended up in the ocean away from the U.S. Navy. This happened to Scott Carpenter in his Mercury flight, and the Gemini VIII astronauts in their emergency over the Pacific Ocean. Screen Shot 2022-10-12 at 9.14.24 AM by John Ratliff, on Flickr Note the twin 38 cubic foot cylinders, which were pretty large in diameter, and the Mistral regulator with yellow hoses. The Pararescuemen local purchased these Mistral regulators (probably in Hawaii), for use for training and mission jumps. But the Mistrals were replaced quickly when the U.S. Diver Company produced their first Calypso regulators, and there were also local purchases (they did not have U.S. Navy approval). 'Just thought I'd throw this out during our discussion; not chest-mounted, but a different type of use for the Mistral. John
|
|
|
Post by spirou on Apr 10, 2024 9:59:27 GMT -8
Hi Rainer I like your experiment and a phrase "my own diaphragm". Lets make mental shortcut ... if we omit which part of the lungs we breathe with the closer the regulator's membrane is to the center of "our membrane", the "better" is our breathing fillings. Using double hoses regulator - that is the subject of this thread, we have opportunity to positioned it as close as possible to our membrane...on our back, between shoulder blades or on the chest. On vertical position characteristic is similar with back or chest mount but we are mostly diving on horizontal prone so that is important. When we have reg classical back mounted "we have what we have" depending on the efficiency of the regulator. But when we put same regulator on the chest position we have additional "positive water pressure" factor which we can use (by tuning) for increasing regulator's inhalation characteristics. That is why I like chest mounted double hoses Regards Pawel Hello Pawel, I never try the chest mount , but it must be pleasant, and as you say, the position, and a good adjustment of the regulator can give excellent inhalation performance, but exhalation should be a bit less easy than a back configuration. Question of choice, and sensations. In the rebreather diving community they have the same discussion, where place the bags of the rebreather, some prefer an easy inhalation, others gave priority for exhalation . By the way. It is an evidence that at the end of his live Cousteau use a chest mount , due to his lung problems, regarding the pictures he use the first stage of a GULF, on his chest , it seems that it used a royal mistral cans, with a HP connection, so it can be connected to the GULF MP. The inside of the second stage must be a modified body of a narghilé, who where produced also by la spirotechnique, that can be easily adapted like this. ( It,s so pleasant to be one the boss, or be in the board). The narghilé use a first stage place on a tank on surface, and originally the second stage was placed between the shoulders. Screenshot_2023-10-04-21-14-52-073~2 by Patrick Michel, sur Flickr Respectfully Fred
|
|