Everyone has had the experience of a broken domestic iron because it got knocked off the ironing board but would you think it a legitimate comparison test of domestic irons to see how well each fared subject to a drop test? No? I thought not, but that’s equivalent to what a British diving magazine has resorted to with its latest comparison test of regulators. They wanted to find out which regulator was toughest when subjected to the sort of disaster that rarely happens, by dropping a scuba tank on each or dropping a scuba tank in turn with each regulator fitted. Not very scientific nor easily kept consistent between each drop but they did it anyhow. It was like testing and comparing domestic irons by dropping them on the floor! Magazine editorials have been reduced to performing such stunts because since CE-certification for regulators was introduced and the ANSTI regulator-testing machine was developed to give an objective computerized result, quite frankly all regulators, certainly all those sold at Ocean Leisure, will give an easy breathe.I’m partly to blame for this state of affairs because around thirty years ago I started doing comparison tests of regulators, not only with a breathing machine but with groups of divers who actually breathed off each tested model at depth and compared the qualities of each. When we started doing this we discovered some horrors. Some regulators were not safe to take deeper than eighteen-metres while others were excellent breathers. The test made good copy for the magazine I was technical editor of and we managed to get the overall quality of regulators available up to a high standard. I went with a group of divers and multiple tanks each time down to fifty-metres-plus where they were able to experience the different way in which these regulators delivered air (the densest gas likely to be put through such a device) and make notes. In fact copious notes were made and two divers would breathe off one regulator to check each was good for an out-of-air emergency. It was uncanny in the way the experiences of the different divers coincided. I was always careful to choose experienced divers who were competent to work at depth and checked by springing upon them a written test at depth for nitrogen narcosis before we started the regulator comparisons in earnest. Then CE-certification came in and manufacturers had to make sure their products met the standard or go out of business. In the most recent tests I orchestrated, we found that there was little to choose between them unless any had a positive manufacturing fault. Most recently we were reduced to noting cosmetic differences and by-and-large these tests became pointless. Hence the ‘toughest regulator test’ we have recently witnessed. Of course there are some design differences. Piston-type regulators deliver the most air and for this reason they prove popular with those that dive in warm water conditions, but they are less suitable for use in cold fresh water than diaphragm-type regulators. Many of these have heat-sinks incorporated to take what little warmth there is in the water and transfer it to the very cold gas that is passing depressurized from the diver’s tank. If you are going to use a regulator in water polluted with muck or fine sand, one that is environmentally sealed might be more appropriate. Then there’s the question of servicing. Some makes are less well supplied with spare parts in remote parts of the world than others. Some enjoy very long servicing intervals indeed whereas others should be serviced annually, The staff at Ocean Leisure are exceedingly knowledgeable and if you can tell them your particular needs and requirements will be able to advise you which regulator is best for you. Whichever you choose to buy, hopefully, you won’t experience a car driving over your regulator anytime soon and they all breathe well!
Regulator Testing by Diving Magazines
This entry was posted on 15th February 2015.