Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:01:41 -0400
To: Jeff <jeff@be*.co*>, gzambeck1 <gzambeck1@me*.ne*>
From: Bill Bott <aquadart@ix*.ne*.co*>
Subject: Re: Mix by weight?
Cc: Brian Greenberg <grnbrg@cc*.um*.ca*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com
Jeff,

Your recommendation is on target.  However, it completely leaves Greg out 
of the loop as he is completely lacking when it comes to having a clue!

At 09:17 PM 8/5/00 , Jeff wrote:
>All you need is a pressure gauge and a clue. Scales are for the DOT.
>stfu,
>Jeff
>
>
>gzambeck1 wrote:
>
> > Bill you need to start looking at equipment that can do the mixing by 
> weight and
> > analyzers that have the accuracy that is needed.  You might have some 
> experience
> > to talk about then.
> >
> > Greg Z
> >
> > Bill Bott wrote:
> >
> > > Brian,
> > >
> > > Like so many other dumb ass ideas this has been tossed out for
> > > consideration before.  the fact of the matter is there so many problems
> > > with this idea I'm not sure where to begin but the bottom line is you can
> > > get a more accurate mix with the pressure gauge you are using on your
> > > rig.  If a CDN $100 ( US $67 ) scale was the way to go every mixing 
> station
> > > in the world would be using it.  The fact of the matter is it just 
> does not
> > > work like that in the real world.
> > >
> > > Try this and see what happens:
> > >
> > > Set the tank on the scale with the fill whip attached and the tank valve
> > > closed.  Then pressurize the whip without opening the tank 
> valve.  How much
> > > does the weight as read on the scale change??  Why???  Do it a couple of
> > > times completely breaking the assembly down each time.  Are your results
> > > consistent???
> > >
> > > I'll help you out with this so you don't have to buy the scale to try 
> this
> > > at home.  When you charge the system the weight of the tank will 
> change as
> > > read by the scale because the pressure of the gas in the hose is causing
> > > the hose to stiffen and straight out.   It is the same principal that
> > > causes your analog pressure gauge to work.  That part is
> > > predictable.  However, every time you break the system down to fill 
> another
> > > tank you get things back together just a little differently and the
> > > stresses that cause the hose to flex act in a different direction  and or
> > > to a varying degree.  Some times there will be no change other time the
> > > "weight" will increase as the stresses push down on the tank and other
> > > times the "weight" will decrease.  The amount of force is related to the
> > > pressure in the hose and the direction of the force is related to the 
> shape
> > > which the hose is, for lack of a better term, bent.
> > >
> > > This is NOT a blender friendly situation.  But if you chouse not to 
> take my
> > > word for it spend  CDN $100 for the scale and give it a try.  You 
> will soon
> > > learn why that method is used only under lab conditions and why some
> > > blenders chouse a US $50 ( CDN $75 that exchange rate sucks ) gauge 
> over a
> > > scale.  There was on shop I know of that actually used a digital SPG
> > > attached to the other post when filling doubles.  I don't know if they
> > > still do this but they always managed to give me the gas I asked for 
> ( + or
> > > - .5% or better).  I was spoiled with a $500 digital gauge and a blenders
> > > dream for a fill station ( 2 haskels 1 for air and 1 for gasses) You 
> could
> > > mix any gas to 4500+psi and hit the FO2 within  + or - 0.1 - 0.2% every
> > > time and frankly the O2 analyzer is not any more accurate than that!
> > >
> > > Forget the scale, save your money and do it right or forget about 
> doing it
> > > at all.
> > >
> > > At 06:05 PM 8/2/00 , Brian Greenberg wrote:
> > > >First off, I'm not suggesting this is better than what's being done 
> now, nor
> > > >that it is problem free.  This is something that I have been thinking of
> > > >for a while now, and seems to make sense.  I thought I'd bring it up 
> here,
> > > >and let The Experts(tm) rip it up and add their comments.
> > > >
> > > >Caveat Emptor:  I am not a technical diver, and I don't play one on 
> the net.
> > > >
> > > >Mixed gas is, from what I have seen, traditionally mixed by 
> pressure.  To do
> > > >this well, one needs a fairly accurate (and fairly expensive) gauge, 
> and one
> > > >also needs to worry about compressibility of the various component 
> gases,
> > > >and the speed at which you fill them, which will affect the 
> temperature of
> > > >the mix gas in the tank, and the resulting percentages of the mixture.
> > > >Overall, there are several variables that can make it tricky (though far
> > > >from rocket science) to do accurately.
> > > >
> > > >But why mix by pressure at all?  Why not mix by weight?
> > > >
> > > >I can get at the local office supply store, for CDN$100, a postal 
> scale that
> > > >will measure to 0.1 pound accuracy, with a max weight of 200 pounds.  A
> > > >more accurate scale is probably fairly easy to find.  If we assume 
> that a
> > > >standard 80 holds 6 pounds of air, then a twin 95 set will hold 
> 14.25 pounds
> > > >of air.  If those tanks are filled to 2250psi, the the "guage error" 
> of the
> > > >scale is:
> > > >
> > > >         (error)x (pressure) / range == (.1) x (2250) / 14.25  == 15.8
> > > >
> > > >Which is +/- about 15psi, which is more accurate than a digital 
> gauge, at
> > > >+/- around 50psi.
> > > >
> > > >This of course changes for smaller tanks.  A 40cuft stage, for 
> example, holds
> > > >about 3 pounds of air at 3000psi, resulting in an error of +/- 
> 100psi, but
> > > >this is still quite good.
> > > >
> > > > From here, calculating mix percentages is easy.  For a 50N/25He/25O 
> mix in
> > > >the aforementioned twin 95s.
> > > >
> > > >190 cuft of gas / .79 cuft per mol of gas == 240 mols of gas to fill
> > > >the tank.  That means, we need:
> > > >
> > > >         120 mols of Nitrogen == 120 * 28 grams = 7.4 pounds of N2
> > > >         60 mols of Helium == 60 * 4 grams = .5 pounds of He
> > > >         60 mols of Oxygen == 60 * 32 grams = 4.2 pounds of O2
> > > >
> > > >This works out to 9.6 pounds of Air (7.4 pounds of N2 + 2.2 pounds 
> of O2,
> > > >which is 79% and 21% *by* *molecular count*) blown onto 2 pounds of 
> O2, and
> > > >half a pound of He.
> > > >
> > > >Similarly, if you had 1200psi of this gas left in the tank, then the
> > > >fractions are:
> > > >         Total weight of gas ==  6.5  (This assumes the tank is full 
> at 2250.
> > > >                                         normally, you'd just 
> subtract the
> > > >                                         empty weight of the tank 
> from the
> > > >                                         current weight)
> > > >         6.5 pounds = 2950 grams
> > > >         Number of mols remaining = 2950 / (%N2 * 28 + %O2 * 32 + 
> %He * 4)
> > > >                                   = 2950 / (.5 * 28 + .25 * 32 + 
> .25 * 4)
> > > >                                   = 2950 / 23
> > > >                                   = 128 mols
> > > >
> > > >         Nitrogen == 128 * .5 * 28 = 4.0 pounds
> > > >         Oxygen == 128 *.25 * 32 = 2.3 pounds
> > > >         He == 128 * .25 * 4 = .3 pounds.
> > > >
> > > >It would take a little re-learning, and you would still want to 
> analyse your
> > > >gas before diving it, but it seems to make a lot of sense to 
> me...  As I see
> > > >it, the pros are:
> > > >
> > > >         1)  Cheaper equipment needed
> > > >         2)  Gas temperature is irrelevant
> > > >         3)  Smaller range of measurement results in smaller "gauge 
> error"
> > > >                 (ie:  you're measuring between 80-100 pounds, not 200 -
> > > > 2500 psi
> > > >
> > > >Cons:
> > > >
> > > >         1)  % percent of gas == %psi of tank pressure in old 
> system, % gas
> > > >                 is *NOT* % weight in this system.  May be confusing.
> > > >         2)  % error increases as tank volume decreases
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Comments?
> > > >
> > > >Brian Greenberg
> > > >Armchair diver  :)
> > > >--
> > > >grnbrg@cc*.um*.ca*
> > > >--
> > > >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
> +++++
> > > >+    grnbrg@cc*.um*.ca*     + NETDOC Developer, Libraries 
> Electronic +
> > > >+   PGP public key available.   +       Technologies and 
> Services        +
> > > >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
> +++++
> > > >--
> > > >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> > > >Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> > >
> > > Bill (aquadart) Bott
> > >
> > > --
> > > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> > > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> >
> > --
> > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Bill (aquadart) Bott

--
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]