Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
On Sat, 17 Dec 1994, Rod Farb wrote: > >myself from an old inner tube, and axle grease instead of silicone. :-) > > I don't do it to save money. I get normal regulator maintenance service > annually on the oxygen regulators. The dive store uses regulator > manufacturer's parts for the maintenance. To my knowledge reputable dive > stores do not buy o-rings from auto parts store. They use o-rings from the > same company that makes o-rings for auto parts store, the military and the > space industry. Rod, just a point: The :-) symbol is a smiley, meaning that I meant this as a joke. But it doesn't matter if the manufacturer makes O-Rings for the space industry. The point was that the materials are inappropriate for their intended use. If you ordered an O2 service O-Ring from one of these fine companies that makes O-Rings for the space industry, do you suppose that you'd be getting the same sort of O-Ring that your dive shop installs in your regulator for compressed air service? (And that was a perhaps bad example: Many of us remember the failing O-Ring in the space shuttle.) > Give me twelve documented cases of scuba regulator meltdown because of > oxygen and grease. No, the type of regulator is not important. I put to you that it should be any twelve cases of regulator meltdown or high or intermediate pressure O2 fire because of inappropriate materials. Now, speaking of the space program, which Apollo space shot was it that burned through, killing all of the Astronauts because of *low pressure* oxygen and inappropriate materials? [The special about the space program on TBS that just aired the other night specifically blamed inappropriate materials, and ignorance in handling pure O2 environments in the presence of inappropriate materials. But if you'd asked them the day before the fire, I'm sure they would have told you that it was perfectly safe and that they'd never heard of a fire caused by O2 and the materials they were using.] What makes scuba regulators special? Why would you limit your scope to scuba regs? [.....] > The compressed gas industry is heavily regulated by OSHA. These businesses > have to spend the money to meet the OSHA standards. We all know that it is > good to have the gas industry regulated so that diving companies don't use > axle grease instaed of silicone, o-rings from the auto parts store and > employee-made diaphrams from old inner tubes. Further we know that OSHA > regulations most often do not go far enough, that everyone should do more > than the OHSA regulations require because they are so good and wholesome. Ahhhh...the OSHA red herring. Anything that the government does has to be excessive and for no reason at all, even if they are just enforcing industry standards more or less equally. Hmmm...what year did OSHA come into being? A quick check of http://www.osha.com indicates that the enabling act for OSHA was passed in 1970 and amended in 1990. This more or less matches my memory, although I also seem to remember that they actually didn't do any regulating for a couple of years after 1970. I recall reading an article in 1973 or 1974 about the first visits by OSHA inspectors and how they were fumbling around because they didn't have any real teeth or standards. Now, I worked in a welding yard in 1971, summer thereof, and I remember the lecture I got about not oiling the O2 regulators, or getting oil or grease into the O2 intake area. I was a newbie, assigned to cutting up scrap with an O2 cutting torch much of the time, so I got to handle O2 a lot. And I got damn little training, but this point was covered. So it is likely, based on my experience, that the compressed gas industry actually worried about O2 as a potentially dangerous unsafe material before OSHA was a factor in regulating the work environment. I reject your OSHA argument. > >How many incidents does it take to establish danger, anyway? One? > >Probably too few? Explosion every time you switched on the O2? Surely, > >that is dangerous. Not usually? Well, now we are somewhere on the > >risk-benefit curve. Like the joke about the woman who would accept a > >millon dollars to have sex, but wouldn't take $200 because she wasn't a > >member of the 'oldest profession', "We've established what you are, now we > >are just haggling over price." > > I repeat, Give me twelve documentable cases of scuba regulator meltdown > because of oxygen and grease. I repeat: The type of regulator has nothing to do with it. You have to look at the large amount of experience embodied in the compressed gas industry as a whole. Would you be happy if we only looked at fires or procedures before 1970, or in countries where there is no OSHA? > >I think that there is risk is established, because the compressed gas > >industry wouldn't waste money over a non-risk. Now we are just haggling > >over how much of a risk that there is. > > Reread the OSHA answer. The compressed gas industry is not spending money > because they perceive a great risk; implementation of OSHA requirements > costs the industry money. If you can show that the compressed gas industry used hydrocarbon grease or such before OSHA and quit because of standards imposed on them, then your argument has merit. Based on my experience, I think that rudimentary O2 safety, as in the avoidance of use of oil and hydrocarbon grease from pressurized O2, and the use of correct O2 safe materials was common practice before OSHA. By the way, I do not claim that this is a high risk. I believe that the risk is somewhat akin to the delta in tank explosions that you'd get if we stopped all VIP programs. Nick Simicich - njs@sc*.ga*.ne* - njs@bc*.vn*.ib*.co*
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]