Oxygen regulators, medical type

[[email protected]]

I'm looking for an inexpensive oxygen system for occasional flights up to 18,000 feet MSL. It seems easy to get a used medical type bottle with a regulator that includes a flow restriction built in. You can select, e.g., a 1 lpm flow rate right on the regulator. But, in a glider, you won't be able to reach this control when it is mounted behind the seat. My question is: with this type of regulator, if you add a flow valve and meter downstream, between that regulator and a cannula, and you open the flow on the medical regulator, but shut the added flow valve (unless and until you reach an altitude high enough to need oxygen), will the flow restrictor on the regulator protect the low-pressure hoses from excessive pressure, or will pressure build up enough to pop the hoses?

A side question is how to re-fill such a bottle.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:19:34 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> I'm looking for an inexpensive oxygen system for occasional flights up to 18,000 feet MSL. It seems easy to get a used medical type bottle with a regulator that includes a flow restriction built in. You can select, e.g., a 1 lpm flow rate right on the regulator. But, in a glider, you won't be able to reach this control when it is mounted behind the seat. My question is: with this type of regulator, if you add a flow valve and meter downstream, between that regulator and a cannula, and you open the flow on the medical regulator, but shut the added flow valve (unless and until you reach an altitude high enough to need oxygen), will the flow restrictor on the regulator protect the low-pressure hoses from excessive pressure, or will pressure build up enough to pop the hoses?
>
> A side question is how to re-fill such a bottle.

Sounds a bit like do it yourself brain surgery.
Don't be a fool, buy proper equipment. This is a life support system.
UH

[shkdriver]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 5:19:34 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> I'm looking for an inexpensive oxygen system for occasional flights up to 18,000 feet MSL. It seems easy to get a used medical type bottle with a regulator that includes a flow restriction built in. You can select, e.g., a 1 lpm flow rate right on the regulator. But, in a glider, you won't be able to reach this control when it is mounted behind the seat. My question is: with this type of regulator, if you add a flow valve and meter downstream, between that regulator and a cannula, and you open the flow on the medical regulator, but shut the added flow valve (unless and until you reach an altitude high enough to need oxygen), will the flow restrictor on the regulator protect the low-pressure hoses from excessive pressure, or will pressure build up enough to pop the hoses?
>
> A side question is how to re-fill such a bottle.

I agree with uncl..., would you scuba dive with cobbled together equipment.

[Mark628CA]

The short answer is, yes, the pressure will most probably build to a point that the hoses and/or connections will fail with the system blocked downstream of a simple flow restricting orifice.

Most regulators for aviation use (i.e. Mountain High E & S) have an internal diaphragm that shuts off flow when the downstream pressure equals the upstream pressure. I highly recommend regulators with this feature, for obvious reasons.

At the same time, I can also recognize the (cheaper) alternatives IF YOU DO NOT SHUT OFF THE FLOW COMPLETELY. The pressure will not increase to the point that mechanical components (tubes and connectors) are likely to fail. However, don't forget to turn the flow rate up when you salvage your flight with a low save and are feeling like a superhero for getting back above 12,000. I have heard more than one badly performed bit of karaoke on the radio when somebody forgot to adjust the O2 flow at altitude.

Pressure in the cylinder is often at 2,200 psi or more (using Aviators Breathing Oxygen from a reputable supplier) but nominal pressure is generally from 1,800 to 2,000 psi on a full tank. Most regulators (orifice type) only reduce the pressure to 15-100 psi, and do not shut the flow off when this pressure is reached, allowing the downstream pressure to eventually try to match the much higher cylinder pressure, resulting in failure of the downstream components. Don't worry, your head won't explode, but you might freak out at the sudden pop and hissing noise when it happens. And then the cylinder empties at an enthusiastic rate.

Please extinguish your cigarettes when this happens, or your whole airplane might explode. or at least turn into a merry little fireball.

Regulators with a diaphragm will regulate the pressure to the optimum level needed to operate the delivery mechanism, whether it is an electronic demand system (MH EDS) or a simple flow meter. Medical regulators are not capable of doing anything but reducing pressure to a manageable rate suitable for a constant flow rate with no change in altitude (and therefore increased O2 requirement).

In a nutshell- buy the best stuff for the application (aviation). If you get cheap crap because you are, well, cheap, don't shut off the flow entirely..

It is just your life, so go as cheap as you think it is worth. Remember that Oxygen refills are generally pretty cheap, and unless you have an extremely small cylinder, saving O2 by shutting the flow down doesn't save much in the way of time vs. altitude. Especially when you have to constantly remind yourself to turn it up at altitude or turn it down when the "houses get bigger." The automatic demand systems (M H E&S) take that out of the equation, so you can just concentrate on flying as best you can.

(I have been giving this lecture to hang glider and sailplane pilots since 1988, when I started selling 02 systems. I am also a dealer for M H E&S. In 2014, I got 147 hours of airtime. I was on 02 for 136 of them.)

Have fun, but don't be stupid. Just because you do not use 02 very often does not mean that you should go cheap. Oxygen is fuel for your brain.

[[email protected]]

Thanks for the advice, Mark. I'd love an EDS system. But here in the East we rarely go high enough to need oxygen, it seems that spending $1000 on a system is overkill for use once a year or so. Also, we have very few convenient places around here to refill, other than at "wave camp".

Do those medical regulators not have a diaphragm? You'd think that's necessary, in order to shut off (at least mostly) the flow coming from the high pressure cylinder? I was guessing they have a diaphragm-based pressure reduction followed by an orifice to set the flow rate, but I may be wrong. And perhaps even the diaphragm system would have some leakage through the high pressure side valve even when it's supposedly shut because the diaphragm senses that the output pressure is high. Then again, these regulators have an "off" position, on the same knob as the non-zero flow rates. If that is simply a zero-size orifice, wouldn't the pressure then build up dangerously in the low-pressure side of that device?

[Mark628CA]

From what I know about medical regulators, (admittedly, not much, as they aren't aviation oriented systems) is that they are basically pressure reducing constant flow systems not designed to handle a shutoff at the nose (and brain) end.

Some may have the capability to regulate pressure on both sides of the orifice, but do you really want to bet on it? Do some research. I personally think that using a medical system in an aviation environment would be kind of like trusting a dentist to pilot an airliner.

Your choice. Spending $1000 (or less for some actual aviation systems) is not that much, unless you value your life and aircraft at a lesser amount.

If the regulating device has an "off" position, I would assume that is designed to actually reduce the flow to zero with no build up of high pressure that may compromise the system. But, as I said, I don't much care about what they do in a medical environment. I fly airplanes, and hopefully won't have to worry about sucking O2 in a hospital bed for some time. Until then, I will pick an aviation system.

It is possible that the medical system you refer to has lines and connectors between the cylinder and the flow regulator designed to handle the pressures, but I just don't know. It may have the diaphragm to ensure the downstream pressure is handled, but once again, I don't know. There are many medical systems out there, and I really don't want to do much research into them.. I know what works, and your mileage may vary.

If you fly in an area where supplemental O2 is not often required, and you don't need it that often, and you are unfamiliar with its use, I think you should be extra careful to examine the capabilities of the system you choose.

I've been doing this for a long time, and I shake my head at some pilots that think it is simple to just get a bottle of welding gas (fine, as far as it goes) and just stick a hose in their mouth. It is a bit more complicated than that.

[JS]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:51:25 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> Thanks for the advice, Mark. I'd love an EDS system. But here in the East we rarely go high enough to need oxygen, it seems that spending $1000 on a system is overkill for use once a year or so. Also, we have very few convenient places around here to refill, other than at "wave camp".
>
> Do those medical regulators not have a diaphragm? You'd think that's necessary, in order to shut off (at least mostly) the flow coming from the high pressure cylinder? I was guessing they have a diaphragm-based pressure reduction followed by an orifice to set the flow rate, but I may be wrong. And perhaps even the diaphragm system would have some leakage through the high pressure side valve even when it's supposedly shut because the diaphragm senses that the output pressure is high. Then again, these regulators have an "off" position, on the same knob as the non-zero flow rates. If that is simply a zero-size orifice, wouldn't the pressure then build up dangerously in the low-pressure side of that device?

Agree with others... It's life support.
As evidenced in another thread, it's easy enough to get yourself into trouble on the "occasional 18,000' flight". 100% brain power when that happens is fairly important.
Jim

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

An Aerox system is cheaper than an EDS, maybe half the price. This is life support, as in LIFE, this epitomizes "pound foolish". If you really wanted to save the money on an O2 system, the much smarter choice is to stay at lower altitudes where you do not need it. This is not something to jury rig or kluge together on a budget with parts not designed for this use. Honestly!!!!

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:51:25 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> Thanks for the advice, Mark. I'd love an EDS system. But here in the East we rarely go high enough to need oxygen, it seems that spending $1000 on a system is overkill for use once a year or so. Also, we have very few convenient places around here to refill, other than at "wave camp".
>

[AS]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:56:53 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:19:34 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > I'm looking for an inexpensive oxygen system for occasional flights up to 18,000 feet MSL. It seems easy to get a used medical type bottle with a regulator that includes a flow restriction built in. You can select, e.g., a 1 lpm flow rate right on the regulator. But, in a glider, you won't be able to reach this control when it is mounted behind the seat. My question is: with this type of regulator, if you add a flow valve and meter downstream, between that regulator and a cannula, and you open the flow on the medical regulator, but shut the added flow valve (unless and until you reach an altitude high enough to need oxygen), will the flow restrictor on the regulator protect the low-pressure hoses from excessive pressure, or will pressure build up enough to pop the hoses?
> >
> > A side question is how to re-fill such a bottle.
>
> Sounds a bit like do it yourself brain surgery.
> Don't be a fool, buy proper equipment. This is a life support system.
> UH

I can only second UH! I happened to attend a wave camp in the WVa where one participants decided to use a cheap medical mask on his A8A-regulator. Due to the cold, the mask shrank more than the hose and it fell out of the mask without him noticing. Although he correctly readjusted the flow according to altitude gain and the flow indicator showed 'green', the O2 was not getting to his mask. When it was getting late, we radioed the pilot and he was answering completely incoherent. We talked him into pulling the spoilers. He came down and landed with a huge headache. He stated that he had no recollection of being above 18,000'; the barograph (remember those?;-) )showed that he was well above the wave window's ceiling!
Sorry if I went off on a tangent here but it shows what happens if you skimp on vital equipment. You could end up paying the ultimate price!

Uli
AS

[Tango Eight]

Agreed with most of the foregoing.

I'd be a lot more inclined to recommend aerox, if they didn't sell such complete garbage. For instance take a look here:

http://wingsandwheels.com/oxygen-equipment/aerox/cannula-masks.html

That clear plastic mask is a total embarrassment, likely to break before first use (that's its best feature -- saves failure at 25K feet). The needle valve and flow meter assembly shown (the one with the right angle valve at the inlet) will almost certainly break on you too. Total rubbish. You guys at W&W ought to be ashamed to carry that stuff.

You can assemble a decent quality aerox system, but you have to pick and choose. Their regulators seem to be okay and the "glow meter" flow meters (see for instance @ Chief aircraft) seem to be rugged enough (well, two seasons and haven't broken mine yet). The blue silicone masks are okay, but seem exorbitantly expensive for what they are. You'll be annoyed when you spend almost $200 and the thing shows up with a tag that says "return to manufacturer by such and such a date for overhaul".

M&H has their issues too. I had a borrowed EDS system fail (wide open) on me in flight at 14,000. Man that was exciting. I talked to M&H about it the next day, they walked me through some basic trouble shooting, finally agreed that the unit was dead, and not repairable. They don't have any built in back up protection, even in the event that the battery just runs down. Really? On a life support system?

So yeah, I agree with the "go for quality -- it's your life" sentiments expressed by others here. Wish the manufacturers shared them.

Best regards,

Evan Ludeman / T8

[IA DPE]

Perhaps a session in an altitude chamber would change your mind re: cheap equipment and flying at altitude. The onset of loss of consciousness is incipient- you feel so good you don't even know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSrGfElyfVE

Perhaps your club could buy a system for all members to use occasionally?

If I couldn't have quality equipment, I wouldn't do it.

[son_of_flubber]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 9:51:25 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> But here in the East we rarely go high enough to need oxygen

A physiologist pointed out to me that a pilot's performance will often benefit from supplemental oxygen well below the levels stipulated by the FAR. If you have an EDS system, you might start to use O2 at a lower altitude than you anticipate.

Related, Dr Dan wrote a good article about the reliability of using a pulse oximeter to evaluate the efficacy of your supplemental oxygen system:

http://www.danlj.org/~danlj/Soaring/SoaringRx/2012-06-Pulse-Ox-Accuracy-p18-20-22.pdf

[son_of_flubber]

Edited for clarity:

Dr Dan wrote a good article about the UNRELIABILITY of using a pulse oximeter to evaluate the efficacy of your supplemental oxygen system:

http://www.danlj.org/~danlj/Soaring/SoaringRx/2012-06-Pulse-Ox-Accuracy-p18-20-22.pdf

[Dan Marotta]

Mountain High...

On 11/6/2015 5:52 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
> They don't have any built in back up protection, even in the event that the battery just runs down. Really?

I was at 17,900' about 90 miles from home in the Colorado Rockies when
my Mountain High system began chirping its alarm. I flew a high speed
final glide home (there was a lot of lift to reduce descent) thinking I
was out of oxygen. On the ground, I found plenty of O2 in my tank so I
swapped the batteries in the electronic box and everything went back to
normal. I had the batteries in the cockpit but didn't think of swapping
until I was on the ground.

--
Dan, 5J

[Richard[_9_]]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:51:25 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> Thanks for the advice, Mark. I'd love an EDS system. But here in the East we rarely go high enough to need oxygen, it seems that spending $1000 on a system is overkill for use once a year or so. Also, we have very few convenient places around here to refill, other than at "wave camp".
>
> Do those medical regulators not have a diaphragm? You'd think that's necessary, in order to shut off (at least mostly) the flow coming from the high pressure cylinder? I was guessing they have a diaphragm-based pressure reduction followed by an orifice to set the flow rate, but I may be wrong. And perhaps even the diaphragm system would have some leakage through the high pressure side valve even when it's supposedly shut because the diaphragm senses that the output pressure is high. Then again, these regulators have an "off" position, on the same knob as the non-zero flow rates. If that is simply a zero-size orifice, wouldn't the pressure then build up dangerously in the low-pressure side of that device?

I also agree that you should not cobble an Oxygen System. Please read this article about Hypoxia

http://www.craggyaero.com/hypoxia.htm

Mountain High has the constant flow systems including a cylinder price range from $500 to $600.

http://www.craggyaero.com/xcr_systems1.htm

EDS system with a small bottle about $849

http://www.craggyaero.com/edssystem1.htm

Call to get exact prices and cylinder sizes.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[[email protected]]

If you can't afford a proper oxygen system, I will give you an A-8 regulator and Oxymizer flow meter if you promise not to try a non certified oxygen system.
johnsinclair210(at)yahoo.com

[[email protected]]

What's the difference, if any, in the principle of operation of the regulators in these constant-flow systems vs. the medical ones? (Other then them not having a flow restrictor built in.) In both cases, if the output is blocked (flow valve closed), does the regulator ensure the high input (cylinder) pressure does not bleed into the output?

[Mark628CA]

OK, Moshe, apparently you aren't reading this. You are still in the dark about what I am saying. ALL Regulators have a flow restrictor. That is what they do. (Got it?) SOME regulators do not prevent the pressure from building up on the low pressure side. SOME have a diaphragm that keeps the pressure on the low side from equaling the high side pressure if the flow is shut off completely. These are designed for aviation. Medical regulators are not designed for aviation. You are planning to use this in aviation. Use a regulator and system designed for aviation. Can I be any more clear?

[[email protected]]

Mark, please stop shouting. I am trying to learn how these systems are designed. Whether medical or aviation, their purpose is to convert a very high and non-constant pressure (in the cylinder) into a constant flow at low pressure (into your cannula or mask). Here is what I've garnered so far, which may or may not be correct, but give me facts not labels:

A "pressure regulator" per se regulates pressure, not flow. *IF* its output pressure is constant, then the flow from there through a given small orifice will be constant, even as the source cylinder pressure decreases as the oxygen is used up. This orifice is the flow regulator, separate from the pressure regulator. It operates at a much lower pressure (20-50 PSI) than the cylinder pressure (1000-2000 PSI).

These two "regulators" may be combined in the same physical unit, or separated by a hose. For use in a glider where you cannot reach (or even look at) the pressure regulator on the cylinder, you would want the flow regulator separated and within reach. A typical pellet type flow meter which has a needle valve to adjust the flow then serves as the flow regulator. The pressure in the hose upstream of that meter needs to be reasonably low (say under 50 PSI). If you close that flow valve, what keeps the hose pressure from building up? That's the job of the pressure regulator.

There is a diagram of a diaphragm type pressure regulator here, making its operation clear:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_regulator

My question relates to the high pressure valve that is operated by the diaphragm of the pressure regulator, labeled a "poppet" in that diagram. When "closed", to what extent does it leak?

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Dear Moshe..

The reason people are getting frustrated as it is not just your life you are risking but those on the ground and in the air with you. If you want to know about medical oxygen systems contact a medical supplier. You keep asking questions like you are going to try to build an aviation oxy system out of medical oxy system, stop it, that is incredibly, selfish and stupid. I have never insulted anyone on this group, but come on!

I had the proper oyx system and on one flight I noticed I was not making good decisions, was confused about what my computer was telling me and I ended up landing with full ballast without knowing until the ship felt heavy on roll out (could have had a nasty fatal stall as I did not fly faster for higher wing loading). Had kink in the plastic tubing. After that I started to fly with a oxymeter on my finger. Point being do not take chances with life support, period end of story! If you cannot figure this out, you should not be driving let alone flying. As I said earlier, if you do not want to spend the $400 it takes for an oxy system, stay below 12,500. But frankly I would have to question any of your judgement, due to your persistent line of questioning. How about asking if anyone has a used aerox system for sale instead?


On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 9:35:49 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> Mark, please stop shouting. I am trying to learn how these systems are designed. Whether medical or aviation, their purpose is to convert a very high and non-constant pressure (in the cylinder) into a constant flow at low pressure (into your cannula or mask). Here is what I've garnered so far, which may or may not be correct, but give me facts not labels:
>

[kirk.stant]

On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 11:35:49 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> Mark, please stop shouting. I am trying to learn how these systems are designed.

What you originally said was that you were looking for a cheap alternative to an actual piece of aircraft life support equipment, based on medical discards.

I'm surprised everyone who has answered you HASN'T DONE IT IN ALL CAPS!!!!

So - the answer to your original post is: DON'T EVEN GO THERE, GET A REAL AIRCRAFT O2 SYSTEM!

If price is so important, check out the XCR system (http://www.craggyaero.com/xcr_systems1.htm) or look around for a used system.

Sometimes, it takes people shouting at someone to keep them from doing something really stupid. BTDT!

Cheers,

Kirk
66

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 11/6/2015 10:35 AM, wrote:
> ...I am trying to learn how these systems are
> designed.

The questions you're asking, and the information you want, are/is best
answered/obtained through direct contact with the manufacturers of the
equipment (as opposed to, say, technical sales representatives *representing*
those companies - who themselves [in my engineering experience] are variously
informed from "well" to "not so well.") In the halcyon days of yore, this
often meant digging through a Thomas Register or similar; today the WWW will
likely suffice. But in any case it will likely involve several phone calls and
being routed around inside the home office until you find/are-punted-to
someone on the design side of the product, after (most likely) the people
answering the phones first direct you to (maybe even technical!) sales.

HTH.

Bob W.

[[email protected]]

A lot of people are flying with systems designed for aviation but made 20, 40, even 60 years ago. And besides mechanical failures, other things can go wrong - see some anecdotes posted above and below, such as kinks in hoses, hoses pulled off of a fitting, etc. No matter how official and expensive a system is, I would use a flow meter to verify the flow (and still need to check that hose still reaches the mask etc). An exception is an EDS system, for which a flow meter is useless. But at least you can feel the puffs of gas in your nose (if using a cannula), and the EDS at least has built-in alarms for some sorts of faults.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Amazing, with all due respect a class in logic might help. If systems designed and tested for aviation can fail then what are the chances of a medical system not designed nor tested for aviation could fail. I wrote of the kinked hose, and took steps to not have that happen again, plus I now fly with EDS. I did not have a logic jump that thought "gee this system was designed for aviation and failed, so why don't I make a system out of the cheapest parts I can. If you are oxygen depraved you will not be checking a flow meter, nor understand what it is telling you. Did you notice how no thinks this is a good idea?

Sounds like a candidate for the darwin award, and the absolute fixed thinker award. I remember seeing a news clip about an idiot that was trying to fill a gas tank at night from a can, couldn't see so they lit a match.



On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 11:13:08 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> A lot of people are flying with systems designed for aviation but made 20, 40, even 60 years ago. And besides mechanical failures, other things can go wrong - see some anecdotes posted above and below, such as kinks in hoses, hoses pulled off of a fitting, etc. No matter how official and expensive a system is, I would use a flow meter to verify the flow (and still need to check that hose still reaches the mask etc). An exception is an EDS system, for which a flow meter is useless. But at least you can feel the puffs of gas in your nose (if using a cannula), and the EDS at least has built-in alarms for some sorts of faults.

[[email protected]]

This reminds me of a BG-12 owner I knew a while back. He cut a 12 X 12 " hole in the aft fuselage, so he could inspect and lube things in there. Fitted his custom hatch with a couple of hinges and a little sliding latch. Several pilots tried to tell him he had drastically weakened the structure, because the skin was most of the structure.
He wouldn't hear a word of it.
About 6 months later, he didn't return after the days flying. Search plane found the wreckage near Strawberry strip. We couldn't tell if the boom broke in flight or during what looked like a cart-wheel maneuver, but the fuselage broke right through his little hatch!
I figure 2% will never get the word,
JJ

[Mark628CA]

Since you are obviously looking for some feel-good opinions about using your kluged together inappropriate and possibly hazardous system to avoid spending some extra cash on a system designed for the actual aviation application, I suggest you check out this site in its entirety. It spells out all of the requirements for supplemental oxygen use in aircraft. What you propose is not compliant with these requirements.

http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resources/PIC-archive/Pilot-and-Passenger-Physiology/Oxygen-Use-in-Aviation

And since you are trying to save some money on aviation emergency and safety equipment, why don't you just eliminate that expensive and rarely used parachute? You can easily remove that overly technical nylon canopy and replace it with old bedsheets and socks. I mean, really, why spend the money on something you hardly ever use?

That's enough of this. I gave my advice and seems like most everybody agrees. Do what you want. I will be looking for your test results on the NTSB Accident reports.

[Mark628CA]

BTW, your medical system as you described it in your original post says that you can set a "I lpm" (liter per minute) rate. FAA protocols for oxygen use specify 1 liter per minute per 10,000 feet. That means 18,000 feet requires 1.8 liters per minute using a mask or cannula. Oxymizer cannulae can handle this due to their oxygen storage capability, and the demand systems from MH can reduce it further.

Once again, I urge you to give up on saving money on essential high-altitude life saving equipment and buy something reasonable, and compliant with established requirements for oxygen use in aircraft.

[shkdriver]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 5:19:34 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> I'm looking for an---

Moshe..,
Be honest, deep down do you Know and Understand You Could Die,

Or, deep down, do you really believe that you would always be able to detect and take effective action to correct a "supplemental" oxygen problem. And being confident in your conviction of your own abilities to always take thoughtful action, do you view oxygen use while at altitude as a "nice accessory" that is too expensive?. If so, this misconception has a name, "It won't happen to me"
I'm convinced that the strong reaction to your proposal is directly due to others concern for your continued existence.

Safety regulations like those for oxygen use are written in the blood of the dead. This statement is not hyperbole.

Good Lift
Scott

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 11/6/2015 8:09 PM, shkdriver wrote:
> On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 5:19:34 PM UTC-6,
> wrote:
>> I'm looking for an---
>
> Moshe.., Be honest, deep down do you Know and Understand You Could Die,
>
> <Snip...> I'm convinced that the strong reaction to
> your proposal is directly due to others concern for your continued
> existence.
>
> Safety regulations like those for oxygen use are written in the blood of
> the dead. This statement is not hyperbole.
>
> Good Lift Scott

Not intending to pile on, but it occurs to me my previous - neutrally-written
- post might be misconstrued as "permission to roll your own with my
blessing." It really wasn't. Rather - since the OP seemed (ahem!) - dead set
on obtaining some specific engineering type information, it was simply an
attempt to point him in a better direction than RAS. My guess is - engineering
information aside - medical equipment manufacturers' reactions will pretty
much mirror RAS'. (Lettuce know!)

It may take some doing in that part of the world (eastern U.S.), but I also
highly recommend jumping through whatever hoops are necessary to "take a
chamber ride" if at all possible, so's to safely get first-hand knowledge of
one's individual oxygen starvation symptoms. In any group of 10 or so
participants, you're likely going to see reactions from "obviously goofy" to
"essentially none before unconsciousness." Regardless of one's reactions,
since it's your life you're betting on, in the absence of first-hand knowledge
only Darwinian-denialists would bet on being in that tiny group capable of
recognizing what's going on in time to actually want/be able to do anything
effective about the situation.

Bob W.

P.S. On my ride, that's what I saw. I also learned I seemed to be lacking in
"obvious symptoms" (beyond likely-terminal-stupidity, of course) for the 5
minutes we spent at 25,000 feet.

[[email protected]]

Two points. Even the Aviation systems can have trouble. A constant flow system, Aerox or Mountain High can be fine for the east, but EVEN AVIATION SYSTEMS CAN HAVE PROBLEMS.

Anyone flying what the original Aerox thin flow meter THROW IT AWAY. Mine broke in half in wave over MT Mitchel in NC, at 23,000 still going up. The original system should NOT be sold to glider pilots. The material is thin and DOES NOT TOLERATE COLD. When I called the company and told them their equipment almost killed me, they told me they also have a thicker, different material that is tested to -50. That is the one you want, not the thin original.

Also, about Bobs point in the altitude chamber, with the chamber ride you have been breathing 100% oxygen for 30 minutes before they take you up. You have roughly 2.5 liters of reserve volume in your lungs, plus hyper oxygenated tissue at this point. It takes a little while to get symptoms.

In the wave, about 2 hours into the flight when my system broke, on the first breath I WAS IN DEEP TROUBLE. In the wave, you have no reserve in your lungs or your tissue, and you immediately have problems.

After that experience I bought a Mountain High, and will NEVER fly wave again without at least a small, (10-15 minute) reserve bottle.

Kevin R. Anderson
92, formerly 192

[[email protected]]

Geez guys...let the man do what he wants with oxygen.
Social darwinism will be the final judge.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 8:13:50 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> Geez guys...let the man do what he wants with oxygen.
> Social darwinism will be the final judge.

As mentioned above he risks not only his life but the lives of others in the air and on the ground, with he dumb ass idea of kluging a medical oxy system for aviation oxy. Social darwinism will take him out in another way, like when he uses the butt of his loaded pistol to hammer in a nail.

[AS]

On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 7:04:08 AM UTC-5, AS wrote:
> On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:56:53 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:19:34 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > > I'm looking for an inexpensive oxygen system for occasional flights up to 18,000 feet MSL. It seems easy to get a used medical type bottle with a regulator that includes a flow restriction built in. You can select, e.g., a 1 lpm flow rate right on the regulator. But, in a glider, you won't be able to reach this control when it is mounted behind the seat. My question is: with this type of regulator, if you add a flow valve and meter downstream, between that regulator and a cannula, and you open the flow on the medical regulator, but shut the added flow valve (unless and until you reach an altitude high enough to need oxygen), will the flow restrictor on the regulator protect the low-pressure hoses from excessive pressure, or will pressure build up enough to pop the hoses?
> > >
> > > A side question is how to re-fill such a bottle.
> >
> > Sounds a bit like do it yourself brain surgery.
> > Don't be a fool, buy proper equipment. This is a life support system.
> > UH
>
> I can only second UH! I happened to attend a wave camp in the WVa where one participants decided to use a cheap medical mask on his A8A-regulator. Due to the cold, the mask shrank more than the hose and it fell out of the mask without him noticing. Although he correctly readjusted the flow according to altitude gain and the flow indicator showed 'green', the O2 was not getting to his mask. When it was getting late, we radioed the pilot and he was answering completely incoherent. We talked him into pulling the spoilers.. He came down and landed with a huge headache. He stated that he had no recollection of being above 18,000'; the barograph (remember those?;-) )showed that he was well above the wave window's ceiling!
> Sorry if I went off on a tangent here but it shows what happens if you skimp on vital equipment. You could end up paying the ultimate price!
>
> Uli
> AS

Not wanting to beat a dead horse any further but I found this very informative WW-II US Navy training film on this subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Hg7gzz9jE

Uli
AS

[Dave Nadler]

On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:19:34 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> I'm looking for an inexpensive oxygen system...

Reading this may prove helpful:
http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Origin-Species-Abridged/dp/0809057352/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447208697&sr=8-1&keywords=darwin+leakey