 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / UK Scuba / October 2007M26 valves
Doubtless some of you have read about the new EU Directive over differentiating between valves used for air and those used for Nitrox. I wrote to my MP about it, and he wrote to the Chief Executive of the HSE and the relevant Minister. Below are the two replies, uneditted and in their entirety... >From Geoffrey Podger, Chief Exec, HSE, dated 8 July 2007. "New EU standard for Diving Tank pillar valve sizes "Thank you for your letter dated 8 June 2007, enclosing one from your constituent Mr Danny Edmunds about the above standard, which is due to be implemented in August 2008. "As your constituent correctly says in his correspondence, HSE did not support the drafting or introduction of BS EN 144-3, on the grounds that it was not necessary to improve safety. However, other CEN committee members accepted it and the proposal became a European standard. "Standards are not mandatory but provide a means of demonstrating appropriate risk controls have been applied - this may of course be achieved in other equally effective ways. Where a standard such as this for respiratory devices exists, it is open to manufacturers to manufacture such devices according to different standards (including their own standards) provided that the manufacturer can show those non- standardised devices meet the essential requirements of the Directive. "Whilst this standard is not enshrined in UK legislation, it is now a harmonised European Standard, which means that it provides guidance to European industry on an accepted means to meet a European Directive. Given this status, it is expected that the UK diving industry will comply with it from it's implementation date of August 2008 and some diving manufacturers are already producing valves to BS EN 144-3 standard. "I hope this helps to clarify our position, yours sincerely Geoffrey Podger, Chief Executive" and from Bill McKenzie, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Work and Pensions dated 5 July 2007. "As you know your letter of 8 June to Caroline Flint who was formerly at the Department of Health has been transferred to this Department for reply. You wrote on behalf of Mr Danny Edmunds at <my address here> about his concerns on the standard applied to diving tank pillar valves. I am replying as the Minister responsible for health and safety issues. "I note that you also wrote to Geoffrey Podger, Chief Executive of the Health and Safety Executive, and I have nothing to add to his reply. "Yours sincerely, Bill McKenzie" I'm sure I'm going to wish I didn't ask, but, in a nutshell, what are the standard for each type valve and why? Lee As I understand it, any tank (and hence first stage) being filled with a mix of higher than 22% Oxygen needs to have an M26 valve fitted to it, which has a slightly larger fitting than yer average DIN. The logic behind it appears to be to prevent a reg not suited for high levels of O2 being used with high levels of Oxygen by mistake. > As I understand it, any tank (and hence first stage) being filled with > a mix of higher than 22% Oxygen needs to have an M26 valve fitted to > it, which has a slightly larger fitting than yer average DIN. The > logic behind it appears to be to prevent a reg not suited for high > levels of O2 being used with high levels of Oxygen by mistake. If you're right, that's going to be really unpopular. This means that all regulators formerly used for Nitrox will have to be modified to be used in the future and that, once modified, they will no longer be usable on other valves. It also means that nobody bringing their regulators on a visit to the UK will be able to use nitrox or . . . Wow, what a mess that's going to be. Better you than me. Lee >As I understand it, any tank (and hence first stage) being filled with >a mix of higher than 22% Oxygen needs to have an M26 valve fitted to >it, which has a slightly larger fitting than yer average DIN. The >logic behind it appears to be to prevent a reg not suited for high >levels of O2 being used with high levels of Oxygen by mistake. Some one will produce an insert to screw into the M26 thread to enable a yoke clamp to be used the same as with a M25 Valve. Or if they do go ahead with an obstructer (shape size of valve head etc) method to prevent a clap valve being used over an insert, then an adapter to permit a clamp valve to be used. Can anyone see the problem with this as the objective of the rules (apart from being ill thought through) it to make partial pressure filling safer. The blended gas going through the first stage is going to be less then 40% for normal requirements. Then again, several private air stations will just ignore the rules. For example. I know of a large extended family all of whom dive. They have their own compressor and partial pressure blend. They have an investment of 30 odd tanks and 12 sets of regs.  SignatureMick Whittingham 'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.' William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2. > Some one will produce an insert to screw into the M26 thread to enable a > yoke clamp to be used the same as with a M25 Valve. Or if they do go ahead [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The blended gas going through the first stage is going to be less then 40% > for normal requirements. I certainly see a problem with it. What I don't see is that it's a solution to anything. As I recall, you guys have to have special markings on your tanks to use nitrox in them, right? Are you telling me that that your fill techs can't see the markings, so they need a different valve to guarantee they only put nitrox in a nitrox tank or are you telling me that your divers are so numb that they can't see the markings and dive nitrox like it was air or air like it was nitrox? I think better of your people than you do. The only thing I can see that this does is make it very hard, more likely expensive, for someone that sometimes breathes nitrox and sometimes breathes air. You're likely to need two sets of regulators or, at least, two first stages, all for no gain at all. Lee > > Some one will produce an insert to screw into the M26 thread to enable a > > yoke clamp to be used the same as with a M25 Valve. Or if they do go ahead [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Lee That's pretty much my take on it Lee. The only ones I can see with an immediate benefit are the manufacturers. I could just understand the argument that if you're breathing over 40% a different fitting might be needed (for instance my main regs can't be used with anything over 40% so I wouldn't want to stick them on a mix higher than that - not that I'm likely to), but I can't see the argument behind 22% being the bar. And it doesn't take into account trimix diving at all. The rule seems to have been drawn up by someone with at best limited knowledge of diving and the nature of the market. However there are already adaptors on the market but personally I'm just going to slap a DIN insert in. Nah mate I use A-clamp init... ;-) Danny > For example. I know of a large extended family all of whom dive. They > have their own compressor and partial pressure blend. They have an > investment of 30 odd tanks and 12 sets of regs. I'm just me and I have my own compressors and partial pressure blend. I switch what's in the tanks depending on the dive I'm planning so air/nitrox/trimix plus there's an air/argon cylinder knocking about to blow up my drysuit. If I get back from a 20m dive with nitrox in the tank but I'm planning on going down the pool on Tuesday am I really expected to change the valve before blowing air into the stupid thing? This is regulation for the brain-dead writen by the brain-dead. I suppose we get the M23 thread for hypoxic mixes next year and then the M27 for pure oxygen. I have too many tanks and they cost too much time and money to keep them all in service to start duplicating them. nigelH SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Some one will produce an insert to screw into the M26 thread to enable a Nope. The Proposals will see an M26 male thread on the pillarvalve, and a female thread on the first stage. Even Farm Animal Stupid doesn't begin to describe this proposal. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pete Young pete@antipope.dot.org Remove dot. to reply "Just another crouton, floating on the bouillabaisse of life" > Nope. The Proposals will see an M26 male thread on the pillarvalve, > and a female thread on the first stage. > > Even Farm Animal Stupid doesn't begin to describe this proposal. I think I'd be looking into the cost of a compressor about now. The demand, and price of them, is about to increase. Lee >> Some one will produce an insert to screw into the M26 thread to enable a > > Nope. The Proposals will see an M26 male thread on the pillarvalve, > and a female thread on the first stage. > > Even Farm Animal Stupid doesn't begin to describe this proposal. I don't think so Pete - that was the old proposal, the current standard is a female M26 on the pillar valve and a male on the reg. Cheers, Ben SignatureBen Panter, Edinburgh, UK. Email false, http://www.benpanter.co.uk or you could try ben at ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ further to this, i've written to my meps as well. apparently i have seven of em, only one of which i've heard of before (and tht only because he was in eastenders). if you want to do the same then head to this site to track them down... http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members/public/geoSearch.do?language=EN > Nope. The Proposals will see an M26 male thread on the pillarvalve, and a > female thread on the first stage. > > Even Farm Animal Stupid doesn't begin to describe this proposal. Fortunately they have changed this. It's been suggested on another forum that all you need to do to comply with the regulations is get a CE marked adapter for your tanks. Put it on when the dive shop fills it, then take it off and put your regs on it as normal. Since the regulations only apply to the shop, you're fully compliant. Whether the shops will go along with this is another matter, but it does show what a farce the whole thing is. And it also apparently only applies to nitrox as they forgot to include trimix. Jason SignatureSee http://www.scuba-addict.co.uk/ for UK diving reports and the UK Underwater Visibility Database. View the database or add your own report > Fortunately they have changed this. It's been suggested on another forum > that all you need to do to comply with the regulations is get a CE marked > adapter for your tanks. Put it on when the dive shop fills it, then take > it off and put your regs on it as normal. Since the regulations only apply > to the shop, you're fully compliant. Whether the shops will go along with > this is another matter, but it does show what a farce the whole thing is. Good luck on that. You have more faith in the intelligence of your dive shop personnel than I have in mine. Add to that the fact that, if they require a different valve on tank and regulator, they're the ones that profit from the increased business. I sure as the devil hope that this does not spread to my side of the pond. I'm content without owning my own compressor and O2 banks. > And it also apparently only applies to nitrox as they forgot to include > trimix. Those clueless enough to propose something like this probably don't know the difference or, if they do, they probably assume that the higher percentage of O2 in nitrox is the only risk in diving gases other than air. Lee I've been having a conversation with Julie Voce-Pascoe, the head of the HSE Offshore Policy unit. The meat of the conversation is below, taken verbatim from the email she sent me. "We do not hold any documents relating to the origin of the revision of this standard, which started over 7 years ago. CEN, the European Committee for Standardisation, is responsible for producing this standard. Their overall stated aim is to contribute to the objectives of the European Union and European Economic Area with voluntary technical standards which promote free trade, the safety of workers and consumers, interoperability of networks, environmental protection, exploitation of research and development programmes, and public procurement. This supports a more streamlined harmonisation within Europe - a key element of the 'New Approach Directives'. "The British Standards Institution (BSi) is a member of CEN. "As you are aware, the UK voted against the introduction of this standard but were outvoted and are now bound by the majority decision under the consensus rule under which CEN operates. You may find it helpful to consult their website at http://www.cen.eu/cenorm/aboutus/index.asp" She's also sent me a copy of what appears to be the responses from the various EU members to the original proposal which she was supplied by the BSI. I've put the PDF on my website at http://www.dannyedmunds.com/m26.htm danny > As I understand it, any tank (and hence first stage) being filled with > a mix of higher than 22% Oxygen needs to have an M26 valve fitted to > it, which has a slightly larger fitting than yer average DIN. The > logic behind it appears to be to prevent a reg not suited for high > levels of O2 being used with high levels of Oxygen by mistake. But this is only a recommendation isn't it and not a legal requirement. If dive shops continue to support old & new it won't be problem. > "jazzie12...@yahoo.com" <jazzie12...@googlemail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > But this is only a recommendation isn't it and not a legal requirement. > If dive shops continue to support old & new it won't be problem in theory it only applies to people at work - ie not recreational diving. but the guy filling your tanks is at work and then it comes down to the filling station to decide what line to take. my understanding (which is far from perfect) is that the new standard will have to be accounted for when doing the risk factor analysis - in other words you have to include a section in your risk assessment about the m26 valve issue. in theory this is fine until something goes wrong... i guess my interest in this is that i'm trying to understand the logic behind the new requirement. no-one (and i do mean no-one) has come up with any reason for the new standard. if some-one can point to a reason that stands up to scrutiny then i'd be happy. :-) danny jazzie129uk@googlemail.com wrote: <<SNIP>> > i guess my interest in this is that i'm trying to understand the logic > behind the new requirement. no-one (and i do mean no-one) has come up > with any reason for the new standard. if some-one can point to a > reason that stands up to scrutiny then i'd be happy. :-) > > danny IMO this legislation is being driven by the dive industry to force us to spend more money. I know of no problem that this change will solve or even make slightly better. Whoever dreamed this up must be in the pocket of a hardware manufacturer. Regards, Ron MacRa > jazzie129uk@googlemail.com wrote: > <<SNIP>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > better. > Whoever dreamed this up must be in the pocket of a hardware manufacturer. Allegedly it was ScubaPro, but I've not seen any hard evidence to that. Ben SignatureBen Panter, Edinburgh, UK. Email false, http://www.benpanter.co.uk or you could try ben at ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.