Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BFC4CA.1B8608B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have looked extensively at the NS Research filter system and used to sell a variety of filter systems, some of my own design, modeled after those of Lawrence Factor, some made by LF and all using LF cartridges. After reviewing the specs on the NS Research filter system and seeing what is actually in them, I frankly don't believe the specs. The NS filters have only about one tablespoon of actual filter media. To me (I'm always open to be educated) this means that the system has virually no capability for removing gaseous contaminates, many of which could be condensible. Now, if we are confident that the coalescing properties of the filter system are sufficient (looking at the design it is quite an awesome coalescing filter) to remove the majority of the condensable gaseous contaminates, then the specs may well be correct. But I still have a hard time believing that decades of filter technology are totally wrong. Now for the real question. The proof is in the testing. NS Research, when they had a US office, was in the process of having some testing done on their system with (I believe) Trace. I was a dealer for NS Research at that time, but I never heard about the outcome from this testing. Does anyone know? Just for reference, if you want a filter system for "oxygen compatible air", it needs to be able to make oxygen compatible air under the worst conditions. The worst conditions would include a failure of the compressor or primary air filter system that would result in wet, oily air reaching the inlet of the oxygen compatible filter system. This means that your oxygen compatible filter system must be able to produce clean air even if it is connected directly to the final stage of the compressor (simulating a worst case scenario). It needs to be able to do this at least for a period of time that is long enough for you to detect and correct the failure in the breathing air system. This was a point that I had much difficulty making my customers understand. Most of this is moot now, because most people don't worry about oxygen compatible air. In fact, many inject oxygen directly into their oil-lubricated compressors with overpriced O2 injection systems. Not only is the air not "oxygen compatible" but the nitrox that comes out of that compressor isn't either. So if you've had your O2 clean cylinders filled by one of these systems, scrape the O2 clean sticker off, 'cause you ain't o2 clean no mo! For those of you who want to flame me, realize that I am no longer in the business, so I really don't care about any of this. The purpose of this post is to ask one question: What were the results of the air quality testing that NS Research was having done here in the US around 1997? Sincerely, C. Randy Bohrer Underwater Applications Corp voicemail/fax: (707) 222-7528 randy@mi*.co* www.mixedgas.com ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BFC4CA.1B8608B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" = http-equiv=3DContent-Type> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN class=3D303165418-23052000>I have = looked=20 extensively at the NS Research filter system and used to sell a variety = of=20 filter systems, some of my own design, modeled after those of Lawrence = Factor,=20 some made by LF and all using LF cartridges. After reviewing the specs = on the NS=20 Research filter system and seeing what is actually in them, I frankly = don't=20 believe the specs. The NS filters have only about one tablespoon of = actual=20 filter media. To me (I'm always open to be educated) this means that the = system=20 has virually no capability for removing gaseous contaminates, many of = which=20 could be condensible. Now, if we are confident that the coalescing = properties of=20 the filter system are sufficient (looking at the design it is quite an = awesome=20 coalescing filter) to remove the majority of the condensable gaseous=20 contaminates, then the specs may well be correct. But I still have a = hard time=20 believing that decades of filter technology are totally=20 wrong.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D303165418-23052000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN class=3D303165418-23052000>Now = for the real=20 question. The proof is in the testing. NS Research, when they had a US = office,=20 was in the process of having some testing done on their system with (I = believe)=20 Trace. I was a dealer for NS Research at that time, but I never heard = about the=20 outcome from this testing. Does anyone know?</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D303165418-23052000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN class=3D303165418-23052000>Just = for reference,=20 if you want a filter system for "oxygen compatible air", it needs to be = able to=20 make oxygen compatible air under the worst conditions. The worst = conditions=20 would include a failure of the compressor or primary air filter system = that=20 would result in wet, oily air reaching the inlet of the oxygen = compatible filter=20 system. This means that your oxygen compatible filter system must be = able to=20 produce clean air even if it is connected directly to the final stage of = the=20 compressor (simulating a worst case scenario). It needs to be able to do = this at=20 least for a period of time that is long enough for you to detect and = correct the=20 failure in the breathing air system. This was a point that I had much = difficulty=20 making my customers understand.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D303165418-23052000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN class=3D303165418-23052000>Most = of this is moot=20 now, because most people don't worry about oxygen compatible air. = In fact,=20 many inject oxygen directly into their oil-lubricated compressors with=20 overpriced O2 injection systems. Not only is the air not "oxygen = compatible" but=20 the nitrox that comes out of that compressor isn't either. So if you've = had your=20 O2 clean cylinders filled by one of these systems, scrape the O2 clean = sticker=20 off, 'cause you ain't o2 clean no mo!</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D303165418-23052000></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN class=3D303165418-23052000>For = those of you who=20 want to flame me, realize that I am no longer in the business, so I = really don't=20 care about any of this. The purpose of this post is to ask one question: = What=20 were the results of the air quality testing that NS Research was having = done=20 here in the US around 1997?</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sincerely,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>C. Randy Bohrer</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Underwater Applications = Corp</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>voicemail/fax: <FONT size=3D2>(707)=20 222-7528</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20 href=3D"mailto:randy@mi*.co*">randy@mixedgas.com</A></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20 href=3D"http://www.mixedgas.com/">www.mixedgas.com</A></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BFC4CA.1B8608B0-- -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
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]