Healthways DH regulators

[SeaRat]

Phil,

Please see my PM.

John

[tomcatpc]

Seeing the clip of "September Storm" makes me wish I had made my ersatz Healthways tank harness in goldenrod yellow instead of the later aqua blue.... Oh well next time... At least I had a weight belt made in goldenrod.
Someday I will find an affordable Hope-Page mouthpiece...
Mark

[vance]

What is affordable?

[vance]

I'm trying to complie some information on this thread that documents differences in the HW Scuba parts. I found out a couple things when trying to fit a NOS Healthways diaphragm in my Sjuba #2 that I wanted to add.

I got a NOS non-fabric HW diaphragm from a secret stash of beautiful and useful things I know about. When trying to install it, I found it is as thick as a new repro silicone diaphragm. So, I went to my bag of old diaphragms and discovered that there are (at least) two thicknesses on the HW diaphragm.

I had one out of a Deluxe and compared it to the NOS one:



Almost as thick.
Then, I compared it to another one (no idea what it came out of):



WAY thinner.

The old style case ring will clamp the cases tighter than the new style, seemingly having more adjustment. I have tried to clamp a case with a thin diaphragm and a new style ring, and it's sometimes far too loose. However, an old style ring will hold fine on the same reg. I have had to use thicker diaphragms with new style case rings, but either with the old style.

Here's the NOS diaphragm just to make you jealous :

[nikeajax]

Phil, I'm going to make a squisherdowner for mine: put the flange under compression for a week, then really quick like, assemble it all together! It looks to be off by, what 1/32"?

JB

[vance]

I use a clamp from Harbor Freight. It's a 6"er or so. $2.99. I think there's a reference to it back in these pages. It simplifies assembly considerably. You can install the ring and screw while it's compressed.
Here it is:

[vance]

I took my Scuba with JB's SnorkelJet to Monterey for a test dive. I reported on the stellar performance of the SnorkelJet in the thread dedicated to it.

However, the Scuba regulator itself had a problem with water leakage into the air side of the can, which was probably due to the exhaust diaphragm (see the several references to and pictures of it in previous pages of this thread). It is possible that the leak originated somewhere between the top can and main diaphragm, but I doubt it. The leak was gradual, and affected the breathing performance of the regulator very slowly but very strongly at the end.

This is a very important consideration for this regulator's safe use! As pointed out before, failure of the diaphragm seal and subsequent flooding of the air side could be life threatening. These diaphragms are not available, and most of us are making membranes out of materials not intended for this use.

Care must be taken to be sure materials and installation are up to the task. I had used a piece of bicycle innertube which is more robust than thinner materials I had experimented with. The wire retainer and edge of the flange can cut sheet rubber as it is very tight getting it over the rubber. A longer screw would help here, and would allow fitting the retainer over the flange without stressing the rubber. Also, I think the liberal application of RTV around the flange is wise, to ensure a watertight seal.

Others have had success making the diaphragm out of various other materials, and have fixed or not had leakage problems. However, I feel the importance of this issue needs to be pointed out in this thread, as it is likely be used as a resource for information regarding restoring/repairing one of these regulators for use in open water.

I had pool tested this particular regulator, and found no water in the air side after a short time at 8 feet or so. 20 minutes at 30 feet was a different story! I am going to devise a pressure test to be sure my Scubas don't leak!

[SeaRat]

Phil,

Whenever we "make" a part, we then have total responsibility for how that part performs. The exhaust diaphragm I made out of nitrox glove material is both strong, and flexible. I also used two layers, and it is water-tight. I used ShoeGoo around both the inside and the outside as I produced it.

The test I use is to assemble the regulator as I would dive it, then make a very strong inhalation off the mouthpiece. If there is a leak, you can hear it when a partial vacuum is applied to the regulator during inhalation. The regulator should be either mounted on a tank, with the valve off, or with a yolk plug (you may need to put an O-ring into it to make it seal).

What Phil says is very important before taking a regulator into open water. I did not use this technique on a Dacor single hose regulator I was diving about a year and a half ago, and as I went underwater, upon inhalation all I got was water. I immediately switched to my octopus regulator and completed the dive on that regulator. When I got home, I found that the diaphragm had slipped away from the sealing surface, and left a large gap that allowed mostly water upon that first inhalation. So this is pretty important with any regulator, not just vintage double hose regulators.

John

[nikeajax]

Things like this are exactly why I wish more people would participate on the forum, as opposed to lurking in the shadowy depths of silence: it can/could save lives. But, I know, that's not important because it's too much hassle to participate and share what you know, and it's way easier to just read other people's postings... It's easier not to think!

JB

[vance]

Dec 15, 2017 13:17:43 GMT -8 SeaRat said:

Phil,

Whenever we "make" a part, we then have total responsibility for how that part performs. The exhaust diaphragm I made out of nitrox glove material is both strong, and flexible. I also used two layers, and it is water-tight. I used ShoeGoo around both the inside and the outside as I produced it.

The test I use is to assemble the regulator as I would dive it, then make a very strong inhalation off the mouthpiece. If there is a leak, you can hear it when a partial vacuum is applied to the regulator during inhalation. The regulator should be either mounted on a tank, with the valve off, or with a yolk plug (you may need to put an O-ring into it to make it seal).

What Phil says is very important before taking a regulator into open water. I did not use this technique on a Dacor single hose regulator I was diving about a year and a half ago, and as I went underwater, upon inhalation all I got was water. I immediately switched to my octopus regulator and completed the dive on that regulator. When I got home, I found that the diaphragm had slipped away from the sealing surface, and left a large gap that allowed mostly water upon that first inhalation. So this is pretty important with any regulator, not just vintage double hose regulators.

John

I'm not convinced that a suction test of the air-side by mouth for a few seconds is enough in this case. A few people, including John, Mark, and myself, have commented that water has intruded into the case at one time or another. I am not saying that this isn't fixable, or that others haven't fixed it. Alls I'm sayin' (heh) is only that it is a BIG consideration on this regulator. Aside from the possibility of the main diaphragm leaking or being sucked out of alignment, causing flooding of the reg, I don't know of another regulator that has such potential for a disastrous flooding failure, given the second huge hole into the air-side that is the exhaust diaphragm.

The badness that occurred in my regulator was very slow, and was probably been exacerbated by depth. As I suggested, no water intruded the case at 8 feet in, say, 5 minutes. But, a couple of ounces of seawater intruded at 20 working to 30 feet in 30 minutes. I am going to seal up the exhaust holes (duct tape, buuuddy) and apply some water pressure over a considerable amount of time to see if there is any leak. 

I'm not diving another one of these w/o being confident of the exhaust diaphragm seal! 

[crabbyjim]

Would you like to buy a Trieste?

[vance]

Crabby, you make a point. This is the same point the folks at VDH like to pound away at. There is a certain sense in sticking with the things that are well documented, well supported, and proven. It's a good way to go, for most.

Nothing wrong with that!

But, to the tinkerer/mechanic/engineer/experimenter, there is the challenge of getting something to work. Sometimes, the effort doesn't pay off. To many, any effort is just too much to bother with. Let someone else do the homework and the footwork. For most, the best way to go is to just go with what most everyone thinks is the way to go. Pay someone else to fix up your equipment and use it!

That makes sense for most, and is what most people SHOULD do. But, there are those of us who are a bit quirkier, and only really like things that are, maybe, difficult, odd, and/or unexplored. The whole point is the doing: the research, the experimenting, and the problem solving. The community effort on a common goal is also most satisfying, when you can find fellow travelers.

It doesn't always pay off. Sometimes the failures are spectacular. That has never stopped me before! The successes are sweeeeet. There's a huge satisfaction for some of us in overcoming the obstacles and getting the dang thing to work properly.

I guess I'm just sayin', to each his own?

[tomcatpc]

Since I doubled the layering with rubber glove material on my SCUBA I have not had any leaks. Prior to that I had a slight, minor, almost not worth being concerned about leak. I'm thinking that the rubber glove membrane got slightly cut by the screw. If I need to change it out again I will use a piece of tire and use a longer screw on the clamp.
Mark

[SeaRat]

Phil,

I have a couple of points to make. First, you don't need a lot of pressure on the regulator to make this test, and suction pressure will work.

Second, the pressure on the exhaust diaphragm is a positive air pressure, not negative. This is because, in most positions (excepting a head-down dive position) the exhaust valve is above the main diaphragm by about 1.5 inches. This means there is a 1.5 inch head pressure (of water pressure, but from air inside the case) on the exhaust diaphragm. This is what seals the diaphragm on the exhaust tube. Depth has nothing to do with the leak, as that pressure differential is the same regardless of depth.

Third, I think you are using material which is too thick to make a seal around the exhaust tube. The thicker the material, the wider the folds, and it is the folds which give an avenue for water to enter into the regulator box.

Finally, whenever I use an experimental regulator in the field I do it on my twin 45, which is equipped with a duel post manifold. This setup allows me to have a completely redundant regulator as my "safe second." (I know you already know this, but wanted to state it so others, perhaps new to our forum, would also know.). Once I have "qualified" an experimental regulator for open water, only then do I dive it without a backup, as I did for the second dive on my video, "Lampreys Spawning, Two Dives."

I hope this does help.

John

[crabbyjim]

Dec 15, 2017 19:14:47 GMT -8 vance said:

Crabby, you make a point. This is the same point the folks at VDH like to pound away at. There is a certain sense in sticking with the things that are well documented, well supported, and proven. It's a good way to go, for most.

Nothing wrong with that!

But, to the tinkerer/mechanic/engineer/experimenter, there is the challenge of getting something to work. Sometimes, the effort doesn't pay off. To many, any effort is just too much to bother with. Let someone else do the homework and the footwork. For most, the best way to go is to just go with what most everyone thinks is the way to go. Pay someone else to fix up your equipment and use it!

That makes sense for most, and is what most people SHOULD do. But, there are those of us who are a bit quirkier, and only really like things that are, maybe, difficult, odd, and/or unexplored. The whole point is the doing: the research, the experimenting, and the problem solving. The community effort on a common goal is also most satisfying, when you can find fellow travelers.

It doesn't always pay off. Sometimes the failures are spectacular. That has never stopped me before! The successes are sweeeeet. There's a huge satisfaction for some of us in overcoming the obstacles and getting the dang thing to work properly.

I guess I'm just sayin', to each his own?

Tinkering and modifying unusual equipment is what many people on this forum are all about, but as many others have cautioned, scuba diving has inherent dangers and safety should not be taken lightly.  That said, in our future dives, I will stick closer to my buddy.