Off with the BOV
- Thread starter PeterN
- Start date
alexasigno
Member
I'd really like to see manufacturer data on WOB on both CCR/OC. I saw a presentation at Oztek on the Shrimp's WOB data. It showed great OC performance but really poor CC WOB. Seems the opposite to my JJ one. I'd like to change but no data to know what to change to?
PeterN
Active Member
I know, I know, I know, one cannot tell WOB by subjectively judging how easy it breathes, but....
When I went back to just the DSV I swear that the effort was less.
Certainly it is more comfortable and that may be a large part of it, but just as I feel I can tell the difference between good and not so good OC regs, I am finding a benifit.
For those who wish to pick on Brad, have at it. But I think he is spot on for this issue. Show me the numbers. After all, is there a more fundamental issue for us than WOB?
Sent from my SGH-T989D using Tapatalk 2
I started out on the old Kiss BOV, so anything was an improvement, and the shrimp certainly was. Would be interesting to see what WOB on it actually is.
I'd have thought the JJ and AP ones would be similar to their DSVs, but the AP was to me acceptable in OC ( in that it worked) while the JJ was crap in OC. I just had a clunky long weekend with a Jetsam Dive Rite one. CC seemed ok when it was dry, but switching forwards and backwards seemed to let water in. Shrimp to me is the best compromise if CC, OC and tightness/ dryness. I've only, recently dived a revo without a BOV, and while really really nice, I'm not 100% happy like that.
I'd have thought the JJ and AP ones would be similar to their DSVs, but the AP was to me acceptable in OC ( in that it worked) while the JJ was crap in OC. I just had a clunky long weekend with a Jetsam Dive Rite one. CC seemed ok when it was dry, but switching forwards and backwards seemed to let water in. Shrimp to me is the best compromise if CC, OC and tightness/ dryness. I've only, recently dived a revo without a BOV, and while really really nice, I'm not 100% happy like that.
alexasigno
Member
I can't remember who did the talk now, I think it may have been Andrew Fock. I've had a look and can't find anything online.
Perhaps they could, perhaps they could publish anything that provides proof that they have actually done some testing and allows us as divers to compare options.... If the BOV is on a CE rb or sold in Europe its even easier as the testing for that required CE mark is standardised...
But if they haven't published any testing of their or others BOVs either they are BS'ing or its true or they only offer a DSV and want to smear all BOVs offered so divers don't want one!!!!!! With published testing its pretty easy to look the relevant data up....
You appear to like muddle, confusion, obscurity. So what when somebody like DL does no more than clearly publish testing that you can't get, for the products you flog, are you what threatened or something by that disclosure of how easily available the data should be?
Personally I find pdfs provide heaps of data which makes looking at certain BOVs quite interesting, especially in direct comparison with others....
http://www.deeplife.co.uk/or_files/DV_DL_ALVBOV_Breathing_Params_A3_100318.pdf
http://www.deeplife.co.uk/or_files/DV_OR_WOB_Respiratory_C1_101111.pdf
Alex, some manufacturers appear to view things slightly differently and feel that uninformed customers make better customers
What I have been able to find and please add too or correct if the manufacturer has published any testing that I have missed is:
All WOB figures as per the following test criteria.
CC = Air at 40m at 75lpm as required for CE
OC = Air at 50m for EN250 at 62.5lpm. Benchmark open circuit reg Apeks TX100 is 0.99J/L.
OSEL ALVBOV
CC = 0.57J/L
OC = 0.89J/L. CE'd for bailout use to 100m.
ISC BOV
CC = unknown - same as DSV? 1.9J/L?
OC = 2.41J/L but on Air at 67m at 62.5lpm
JJ BOV
CC = 1.06J/L
OC = unknown but understand it fails EN250 so >3.0J/L at 50m on air
GG Shrimp
CC = ~1.44J/L based on extrapolation from 40lpm as published for like-like comparison at 75lpm
OC = unknown and unknown if it can meet EN250 or has been tested. ISC testing of old GG BOV with larger diaphragm had that at ~2.0J/L....
APD OCB
CC = unknown - same as DSV? 2.13J/L?
OC = unknown but as passes EN250 <3.0J/L at 50m on air. Only CE'd for bailout use to 50m.
Poseidon Mk6 BOV
CC = unknown
OC = unknown but as passes EN250 <3.0J/L at 50m on air. Only CE'd for bailout use to 50m.
KISS BOVs
CC = unknown but fail CE testing or untested
OC = unknown but understand it fails EN250 so >3.0J/L at 50m on air
VR Sentinel BOV
CC = unknown
OC = unknown but as passes EN250 <3.0J/L at 50m on air. Only CE'd for bailout use to 50m.
HOLLIS BOV
CC = unknown
OC = unknown and unknown if it meets EN250
Aurora Blue
CC = unknown
OC = unknown
APD DSV
CC = 2.13J/L
ISC DSV
CC = 1.9J/L
VR Ouroboros DSV
CC = 0.9J/L
rEvo DSV
CC = unknown
No data published for any BOV or DSV on any FFM but I understand its more than the raw DSV or BOV.
As above, if I have missed a common BOV or a DSV that has published WOB test data or something is wrong based on published data please advise.
Regards
Brad
Last edited:
Chris Brown
Official CAMRA ale tester
What ridiculous nonsense Alex.
Kettle. Black.
You are the one that relishes in muddled confusion via your multi quoting and constant hyper-linking and rhetoric on EN standards.
For example, you list all the manufacturers out as if you are I the know/have access to the data, then you litter your own list with assumptions and guesswork.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Kettle. Black.
You are the one that relishes in muddled confusion via your multi quoting and constant hyper-linking and rhetoric on EN standards.
For example, you list all the manufacturers out as if you are I the know/have access to the data, then you litter your own list with assumptions and guesswork.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Chris Brown
Official CAMRA ale tester
Back to the original point of whether to BOV or not, let's also not forget that the BOV with the lowest WOB in the world is useless if a) it's plugged into a suboptimal gas and b) if the BOV isn't maintained and breathes like crap. (Common)
Another reason why I don't think it's the panacea it's often made out to be
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another reason why I don't think it's the panacea it's often made out to be
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mr fish
Active Member
apox had a few problems with the bov, seems it was a bit of a wet breath , maybe thats been fixed , and a pdf sent to all 36 apox owners ,
the apox bov looks so feeking big and Ugly , it would need to be a good dry breath to give half a chane , lol
wont be nice getting the auto bailout on to a wet breathing oc
Last edited:
Chris Brown
Official CAMRA ale tester
Mr fish
Active Member
well if you have a o2 hit you can autobail to the oc o2 lol i think ,, ill need to look up the pdf on auto bailout ,
Chris Brown
Official CAMRA ale tester
Here ya go mate
http://www.functionalsafetydelusions/theoreticaldesigns/rebreather/bailoutvalve/EN12345.com
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
PeterN
Active Member
Before this thread completely goes down the toilet, I would like to state some assumptions I have about the effect of a BOV.
I assume that any BOV will affect the WOB in a negative way.
We do not have meaningful numbers to compare BOV to DSV performance. The ISC website states a range of performance for their BOV from 1.28 J to 2.41 j, all for a similar test. I would note that these performance numbers are for air at the 70 meter range, not something that most of us would contemplate. I cannot find a coresponding test for the ISC DSV.
I assume that the main and principle reason for the BOV is to deal with a CO2 hit.
Now the big one... I am begining to assume that I am very unlikely to have a CO2 hit... This is not to say I do not plan to deal with one, or that I do not need to worry and mitigate, just that of all the things that might go wrong, this is way down the list.
Flame away.
Peter
I assume that any BOV will affect the WOB in a negative way.
We do not have meaningful numbers to compare BOV to DSV performance. The ISC website states a range of performance for their BOV from 1.28 J to 2.41 j, all for a similar test. I would note that these performance numbers are for air at the 70 meter range, not something that most of us would contemplate. I cannot find a coresponding test for the ISC DSV.
I assume that the main and principle reason for the BOV is to deal with a CO2 hit.
Now the big one... I am begining to assume that I am very unlikely to have a CO2 hit... This is not to say I do not plan to deal with one, or that I do not need to worry and mitigate, just that of all the things that might go wrong, this is way down the list.
Flame away.
Peter
Why so? It's your choice and should be respected as such.
I chose an ISC BOV but decided to modify it for many reasons. One being the weight and the other being my lack of trust in apex regs + added a gag strap.
I don't count on staying on it if I need to use it. But I also do all I can so that I should never have to use it. And in the end like you think it's unlikely that I'll have a co2 hit....but one just never knows.
Choices....
Mark Chase
ATB=AlwaysTalkingBollocks
Narcosis is a wonderfull and deadly thing but i feel a BOV gives me more of a fighting chance
As for WOB? aparently the Shrimp I use has a lower WOB than the standard Inspo DSV?
I had an APOC BOV on order but sadly they only do it in right to left flow so I had to cancle. Alex said he neded to make 50 to make building a left right flow viable.
Persoanly if its as good as his fiugures sugest id say hed sell 50 in a heart beet.
I am going to try one out on the Apoc soon so ill let you know.
ATB
Mark