O2 addition methods

seeboth · 16th April 2008, 19:50

Quote: (Originally Posted by divelermentov)

Sorry mate you are well off course here,
do not dive a mccr with a depth compensating stage !!!!! This does only work for a scr NOT mCCR.
As your upstream pressure increase your o2 output increases as well which will make your loop hyperoxic at depth. THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS. If you than have only one first stage the only thing you can do is turn the supply off and drive the unit home by using the tank valve - not an easy task.

You either use one 1st stage non-depth-compensated as does the rEvo II hybrid. Howver you have to change the systems to eCCR only if you plan to go deeper than i think 80 meters ( Paul correct me if i am wrong).

Another way is to use 2 o2 tanks with 2 1st stages, one feeding the mCCR and one feeding the eCCR.

Good thing here is that a)you dont have to worry so much about the max depth of the mCCR,
b) you can run the mCCR at an ideal IP as well as you can run the ideal IP for the eCCR ( e.g. Inspo wants 7-8 bar ip for the solenoide, mCCr want 10-13 bar)

bad with that is that you will have a) offboard o2 which will make the unit larger - might be a squeeze in some wrecks afterwards
b) you have to maintain 2 1st stages

good thing - if you had an idsependent monitoring such as diamond HUD (www.rebreathersolutions.com - I think-), rEvo dream ( Paul ) or the shearwater HUD, your systems becomes double redundant. If you even throw extra o2 cells in your are redundant except for your scrubber.

good people to talk to are ( in no particular order :-) )
a) John - narked@90
b) martin - tecme.de
c) Paul - he does the rEvo - dont know the website by heart - check the net or PM him he is on this forum as well

but these are only my .02

this system sounds like it would work, but like i said since i know my max depth i could easily just get an orifice (or lock a needle valve to the right size) that is the right size so its max out put, at my max depth, is just below my metabolic rate. Unless i keep adding o2 manually at the same rate as i would have too at shallower depths there shouldnt be a risk of hypoxia, right? unless of course I go deeper than I am planned on which shouldnt be an issue since ill just set the orifice to my max training depth.

Im pretty sure there are units that use this method, and im pretty sure Ive, read about a few home builds that use this method. Ill have to look the threads up again, but i think Dave Sutton has posted on a Mccr that uses a depth compensating first stage and an orifice, and you just use the right orifice for the right depth, then just add more frequently when you are shallower to maintain your po2.

-Alex (the one guy stupid enough to give up his spot for OC trimix to save up for a rebreather)

Packhorse · 16th April 2008, 20:03

It just sounds overly complicated to me.
If you are worried about a CMF system not flowing enough at your max depth then find a reg that can deliver a higher fixed IP. I hear there is a aftermarket Apeks spring that will deliever 20 bar. That will give you a CMF to 100 meters and even to 120meters the flow will be fairly close.

divelermentov · 17th April 2008, 00:19

Quote: (Originally Posted by Packhorse)

It just sounds overly complicated to me.
If you are worried about a CMF system not flowing enough at your max depth then find a reg that can deliver a higher fixed IP. I hear there is a aftermarket Apeks spring that will deliever 20 bar. That will give you a CMF to 100 meters and even to 120meters the flow will be fairly close.

as I understand Alex does not simply want to KISS a eCCR, it is easier to ny a mCCR but instead does want to convert an eCCR into a hybrid such as the rEvoII.

well the problem with building a hybrid breather here is that some eCCRs require a certain IP to be able to work the solenoide, for example the inspo wants an IP for 7.5 bar.

this is pretty low for a mCCR, if you crank the IP up the solenoide might not open anymore as it has to be pushed open against the pressure.

furthermore the gas flow thru the solenoide will cease pretty quickly as well. (edited: if you change the 1st to non-depth compensationg, depending on your ip, as soon as the ip is less than 6.5 over ambient, the solenoide will not be able to deliver 12 lpm flow, which is regarded as a requirement for eCCR for the ascend phase - however as you have a constant flow at the same time you migth get away with less, but thsi is pretty unclear if you do or not !!)

So effectively this will hinder your ability to use the inspos first stage for a hybrid. (edited: which willmostelikely apply to all other eCCRS, except the rEvoII, i think the difference is that the rEvos solenoide can deliver more flow at lower pressure, but again will have to ask Paul on that)

I don't know how they have solved this in the rEvo II, Paul might be able to share some light with this regards. Howver as i understand you will only be able to use the rEvo hybrid to a certain depth before you have to convert to a pure eCCR.

as i dont know the ip requirements of other eCCRs these might be easier to convert than the inspiration.

I think the real advanteg of the hybrid comes in if you were able to use the mCCr to its max depth and when you go deeper just run it eCCR, and when you ascend let the mCCr kick in again. But as i see this you will need two 1st stages for that.

Paul please correct me if I got the rEvoII's concept wrong.

Cheers
c

Packhorse · 17th April 2008, 03:50

Oh I see. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Another solution would be to find a solinoid that can opperate at higher pressure then. I recall someone saying they had a new solinoid developed for Rebreather's. Was is narked@90? This may be worth looking at.
Or instead of a second O2 tank how about a H or Y valve with a fixed IP reg and a compensating one?

divelermentov · 17th April 2008, 04:09

Quote: (Originally Posted by Packhorse)

Oh I see. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Another solution would be to find a solinoid that can opperate at higher pressure then. I recall someone saying they had a new solinoid developed for Rebreather's. Was is narked@90? This may be worth looking at.
Or instead of a second O2 tank how about a H or Y valve with a fixed IP reg and a compensating one?

yes x-valve would work, however difficult to get two 1stages into the rebreather, particular with optima and inspiration.
Furthermore you might get confused when trying to turn on tank off which valve to turn, or you might not even able to reach one of them.

so second on-board tank seems for me most favourable

**jmurba** · 17th April 2008, 08:25

Quote: (Originally Posted by paulraymaekers)

are you sure you will end up with a better unit then the stock unit?

paul

are you sure you ended up with a better unit then the existing units modifying your ida and building you revo ?

nobody · 17th April 2008, 09:32

Quote: (Originally Posted by divelermentov)

as I understand Alex does not simply want to KISS a eCCR, it is easier to ny a mCCR but instead does want to convert an eCCR into a hybrid such as the rEvoII.

well the problem with building a hybrid breather here is that some eCCRs require a certain IP to be able to work the solenoide, for example the inspo wants an IP for 7.5 bar.

this is pretty low for a mCCR, if you crank the IP up the solenoide might not open anymore as it has to be pushed open against the pressure.

furthermore the gas flow thru the solenoide will cease pretty quickly as well.

So effectively this will hinder your ability to use the inspos first stage for a hybrid.

I don't know how they have solved this in the rEvo II, Paul might be able to share some light with this regards. Howver as i understand you will only be able to use the rEvo hybrid to a certain depth before you have to convert to a pure eCCR.

as i dont know the ip requirements of other eCCRs these might be easier to convert than the inspiration.

I think the real advanteg of the hybrid comes in if you were able to use the mCCr to its max depth and when you go deeper just run it eCCR, and when you ascend let the mCCr kick in again. But as i see this you will need two 1st stages for that.

Paul please correct me if I got the rEvoII's concept wrong.

Cheers
c

Why dont you then use a bigger orifice so you get the same flow with a lower ip?

spunkmire · 17th April 2008, 10:22

Christ, this is one of the most complicated thread I have read so far out side of the electronics sub-forums...
Again, I have to agree with Mr Raymaekers..
Do you really reckon you can build a better unit than the existing ones?
-Consider that it may be cheaper, but you will be losing a lot of dives through testing e.t.c., once you have got your unit setup the way you want it, all your different designs will be surplus to requirements (e.g. gas blocks cannot be cheap to build from scratch),
also from what you are writing and the replies your learning curve is definitely at the steep end ( not that I am pretending to know anything).

As an aside, Mercedes-Benz and BMW spend millions on car design, safety testing, road tests and R&D (using many consultants and redesigns) to offer cars performing and styled at the very top of the class, for a high but reasonable price.
Then some bloke goes into Auto-quik, buys a new spoiler, nitro-inject and sound system (or whatever widget) for $100 and bolts it on and thinks he has 'improved' on the manufacturers efforts.

ATB
Will

A bit blunt, but none of the manufacturers offerings have not been tested e.t.c. to a very high standard.

**jmurba** · 17th April 2008, 13:21

Quote: (Originally Posted by spunkmire)

Christ, this is one of the most complicated thread I have read so far out side of the electronics sub-forums...
Again, I have to agree with Mr Raymaekers..
Do you really reckon you can build a better unit than the existing ones?
-Consider that it may be cheaper, but you will be losing a lot of dives through testing e.t.c., once you have got your unit setup the way you want it, all your different designs will be surplus to requirements (e.g. gas blocks cannot be cheap to build from scratch),
also from what you are writing and the replies your learning curve is definitely at the steep end ( not that I am pretending to know anything).

As an aside, Mercedes-Benz and BMW spend millions on car design, safety testing, road tests and R&D (using many consultants and redesigns) to offer cars performing and styled at the very top of the class, for a high but reasonable price.
Then some bloke goes into Auto-quik, buys a new spoiler, nitro-inject and sound system (or whatever widget) for $100 and bolts it on and thinks he has 'improved' on the manufacturers efforts.

ATB
Will

A bit blunt, but none of the manufacturers offerings have not been tested e.t.c. to a very high standard.

Hi

I don't really understand the sense of your post.
you seems to try discouraging lads to home built their rebreather.
you don't want to home buit ok , you think that it requires a big company to to design a rebrather.
So I feel like to respectfully ask you what are you doing on this part of the forum.
Home builders exist, and dive their rebreathers.
Paul use to be a dolphin and ida modifyer
why doubting the capacity of others to do the same ?
a home builder can built every parts of a rebreather except the hoses.
I've dived home made electronics and home made injection systems for years and at the beginning I was asking stupid questions and gentle lads like dave sutton or gordon smith always took the time to explain things to do it rite.
home built sailboat are made everyday by dummies,
home built plane are constructed everydays by pilots
home made submarine are built by amateur all overthe world.

the question is why ?

money ? yes it can be a reason, and why not ? yes a home built is cheaper, but in addition it gives you the huge pleasure to do things yourself and a great knoldege of the gear you are diving.

there is a balance to find between time to spend to built and test and money to spend.

some have time and not enough money,

some have the simple garage appeal, they like their workshop, they like to do things themself and they like to dream hours of their future dives even hypothétical dives but anyway.

please don't discourage homebuilders just tell them your home buildind experience if you have one.

do you have one?

I don't want to offence you or paul saying all of that but I had to tell this.

a home build forum is in my opinion a place where home builder speak about what they are doing or did and a place where potential future home builders ask the home builders hos to do this , how difficult is it etc..

respectfully yours

jean michel

spunkmire · 17th April 2008, 15:11

My point is, why bother modifying a stock unit, when the original designer (Gordon Smaith or Pau Raymaekers) put a lot of effort into making a good unit,
and (no offence to op) they know a lot more about rebreather design (judging by the op's posts) than the op?
Homebuild all the way - great stuff- give it a go-
-but rejigging a stock unit?
BMCL- ok, just some restitching and rerouting- but redesigning the oxygen addition method? Think carefully sir

16th April 2008, 19:50	#11 (permalink)
seeboth New Member Current Rebreather/s: Megalodon Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Wisconsin, United States Posts: 38	Re: O2 addition methods Quote: (Originally Posted by divelermentov) Sorry mate you are well off course here, do not dive a mccr with a depth compensating stage !!!!! This does only work for a scr NOT mCCR. As your upstream pressure increase your o2 output increases as well which will make your loop hyperoxic at depth. THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS. If you than have only one first stage the only thing you can do is turn the supply off and drive the unit home by using the tank valve - not an easy task. You either use one 1st stage non-depth-compensated as does the rEvo II hybrid. Howver you have to change the systems to eCCR only if you plan to go deeper than i think 80 meters ( Paul correct me if i am wrong). Another way is to use 2 o2 tanks with 2 1st stages, one feeding the mCCR and one feeding the eCCR. Good thing here is that a)you dont have to worry so much about the max depth of the mCCR, b) you can run the mCCR at an ideal IP as well as you can run the ideal IP for the eCCR ( e.g. Inspo wants 7-8 bar ip for the solenoide, mCCr want 10-13 bar) bad with that is that you will have a) offboard o2 which will make the unit larger - might be a squeeze in some wrecks afterwards b) you have to maintain 2 1st stages good thing - if you had an idsependent monitoring such as diamond HUD (www.rebreathersolutions.com - I think-), rEvo dream ( Paul ) or the shearwater HUD, your systems becomes double redundant. If you even throw extra o2 cells in your are redundant except for your scrubber. good people to talk to are ( in no particular order :-) ) a) John - narked@90 b) martin - tecme.de c) Paul - he does the rEvo - dont know the website by heart - check the net or PM him he is on this forum as well but these are only my .02 this system sounds like it would work, but like i said since i know my max depth i could easily just get an orifice (or lock a needle valve to the right size) that is the right size so its max out put, at my max depth, is just below my metabolic rate. Unless i keep adding o2 manually at the same rate as i would have too at shallower depths there shouldnt be a risk of hypoxia, right? unless of course I go deeper than I am planned on which shouldnt be an issue since ill just set the orifice to my max training depth. Im pretty sure there are units that use this method, and im pretty sure Ive, read about a few home builds that use this method. Ill have to look the threads up again, but i think Dave Sutton has posted on a Mccr that uses a depth compensating first stage and an orifice, and you just use the right orifice for the right depth, then just add more frequently when you are shallower to maintain your po2. -Alex (the one guy stupid enough to give up his spot for OC trimix to save up for a rebreather) __________________ yes those are double lp steel 121's on my back yes those are the main reason i want a rebreather
(Offline)

16th April 2008, 20:03	#12 (permalink)
Packhorse Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Auckland New Zealand Posts: 100	Re: O2 addition methods It just sounds overly complicated to me. If you are worried about a CMF system not flowing enough at your max depth then find a reg that can deliver a higher fixed IP. I hear there is a aftermarket Apeks spring that will deliever 20 bar. That will give you a CMF to 100 meters and even to 120meters the flow will be fairly close. __________________ There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
(Offline)

17th April 2008, 00:19	#13 (permalink)
divelermentov Nutty dentist - uwdriller Current Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Home Build Join Date: May 2006 Location: Auckland Posts: 600	Re: O2 addition methods Quote: (Originally Posted by Packhorse) It just sounds overly complicated to me. If you are worried about a CMF system not flowing enough at your max depth then find a reg that can deliver a higher fixed IP. I hear there is a aftermarket Apeks spring that will deliever 20 bar. That will give you a CMF to 100 meters and even to 120meters the flow will be fairly close. as I understand Alex does not simply want to KISS a eCCR, it is easier to ny a mCCR but instead does want to convert an eCCR into a hybrid such as the rEvoII. well the problem with building a hybrid breather here is that some eCCRs require a certain IP to be able to work the solenoide, for example the inspo wants an IP for 7.5 bar. this is pretty low for a mCCR, if you crank the IP up the solenoide might not open anymore as it has to be pushed open against the pressure. furthermore the gas flow thru the solenoide will cease pretty quickly as well. (edited: if you change the 1st to non-depth compensationg, depending on your ip, as soon as the ip is less than 6.5 over ambient, the solenoide will not be able to deliver 12 lpm flow, which is regarded as a requirement for eCCR for the ascend phase - however as you have a constant flow at the same time you migth get away with less, but thsi is pretty unclear if you do or not !!) So effectively this will hinder your ability to use the inspos first stage for a hybrid. (edited: which willmostelikely apply to all other eCCRS, except the rEvoII, i think the difference is that the rEvos solenoide can deliver more flow at lower pressure, but again will have to ask Paul on that) I don't know how they have solved this in the rEvo II, Paul might be able to share some light with this regards. Howver as i understand you will only be able to use the rEvo hybrid to a certain depth before you have to convert to a pure eCCR. as i dont know the ip requirements of other eCCRs these might be easier to convert than the inspiration. I think the real advanteg of the hybrid comes in if you were able to use the mCCr to its max depth and when you go deeper just run it eCCR, and when you ascend let the mCCr kick in again. But as i see this you will need two 1st stages for that. Paul please correct me if I got the rEvoII's concept wrong. Cheers c __________________ May The Sorb Be With You Last edited by divelermentov : 18th April 2008 at 04:53.
(Online)

17th April 2008, 03:50	#14 (permalink)
Packhorse Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Auckland New Zealand Posts: 100	Re: O2 addition methods Oh I see. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Another solution would be to find a solinoid that can opperate at higher pressure then. I recall someone saying they had a new solinoid developed for Rebreather's. Was is narked@90? This may be worth looking at. Or instead of a second O2 tank how about a H or Y valve with a fixed IP reg and a compensating one? __________________ There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
(Offline)

17th April 2008, 04:09	#15 (permalink)
divelermentov Nutty dentist - uwdriller Current Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Home Build Join Date: May 2006 Location: Auckland Posts: 600	Re: O2 addition methods Quote: (Originally Posted by Packhorse) Oh I see. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Another solution would be to find a solinoid that can opperate at higher pressure then. I recall someone saying they had a new solinoid developed for Rebreather's. Was is narked@90? This may be worth looking at. Or instead of a second O2 tank how about a H or Y valve with a fixed IP reg and a compensating one? yes x-valve would work, however difficult to get two 1stages into the rebreather, particular with optima and inspiration. Furthermore you might get confused when trying to turn on tank off which valve to turn, or you might not even able to reach one of them. so second on-board tank seems for me most favourable __________________ May The Sorb Be With You
(Online)

17th April 2008, 08:25	#16 (permalink)
jmurba wet bear Current Rebreather/s: Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Home Build Join Date: May 2006 Location: cannes france Posts: 672	Re: O2 addition methods Quote: (Originally Posted by paulraymaekers) are you sure you will end up with a better unit then the stock unit? paul are you sure you ended up with a better unit then the existing units modifying your ida and building you revo ? __________________ when will I be able to think about something else then spending hours underwater, when will I be normal ? http://web.mac.com/jmurba/Site_2/home.html http://web.mac.com/jmurba/Site_3/home.html
(Offline)

17th April 2008, 09:32	#17 (permalink)
nobody New Member Current Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8	Re: O2 addition methods Quote: (Originally Posted by divelermentov) as I understand Alex does not simply want to KISS a eCCR, it is easier to ny a mCCR but instead does want to convert an eCCR into a hybrid such as the rEvoII. well the problem with building a hybrid breather here is that some eCCRs require a certain IP to be able to work the solenoide, for example the inspo wants an IP for 7.5 bar. this is pretty low for a mCCR, if you crank the IP up the solenoide might not open anymore as it has to be pushed open against the pressure. furthermore the gas flow thru the solenoide will cease pretty quickly as well. So effectively this will hinder your ability to use the inspos first stage for a hybrid. I don't know how they have solved this in the rEvo II, Paul might be able to share some light with this regards. Howver as i understand you will only be able to use the rEvo hybrid to a certain depth before you have to convert to a pure eCCR. as i dont know the ip requirements of other eCCRs these might be easier to convert than the inspiration. I think the real advanteg of the hybrid comes in if you were able to use the mCCr to its max depth and when you go deeper just run it eCCR, and when you ascend let the mCCr kick in again. But as i see this you will need two 1st stages for that. Paul please correct me if I got the rEvoII's concept wrong. Cheers c Why dont you then use a bigger orifice so you get the same flow with a lower ip?
(Offline)

17th April 2008, 10:22	#18 (permalink)
spunkmire New Member Current Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: southeast uk Posts: 17	Re: O2 addition methods Christ, this is one of the most complicated thread I have read so far out side of the electronics sub-forums... Again, I have to agree with Mr Raymaekers.. Do you really reckon you can build a better unit than the existing ones? -Consider that it may be cheaper, but you will be losing a lot of dives through testing e.t.c., once you have got your unit setup the way you want it, all your different designs will be surplus to requirements (e.g. gas blocks cannot be cheap to build from scratch), also from what you are writing and the replies your learning curve is definitely at the steep end ( not that I am pretending to know anything). As an aside, Mercedes-Benz and BMW spend millions on car design, safety testing, road tests and R&D (using many consultants and redesigns) to offer cars performing and styled at the very top of the class, for a high but reasonable price. Then some bloke goes into Auto-quik, buys a new spoiler, nitro-inject and sound system (or whatever widget) for $100 and bolts it on and thinks he has 'improved' on the manufacturers efforts. ATB Will A bit blunt, but none of the manufacturers offerings have not been tested e.t.c. to a very high standard. Last edited by spunkmire : 17th April 2008 at 10:23. Reason: crap spelling
(Offline)

17th April 2008, 13:21	#19 (permalink)
jmurba wet bear Current Rebreather/s: Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Home Build Join Date: May 2006 Location: cannes france Posts: 672	Re: O2 addition methods Quote: (Originally Posted by spunkmire) Christ, this is one of the most complicated thread I have read so far out side of the electronics sub-forums... Again, I have to agree with Mr Raymaekers.. Do you really reckon you can build a better unit than the existing ones? -Consider that it may be cheaper, but you will be losing a lot of dives through testing e.t.c., once you have got your unit setup the way you want it, all your different designs will be surplus to requirements (e.g. gas blocks cannot be cheap to build from scratch), also from what you are writing and the replies your learning curve is definitely at the steep end ( not that I am pretending to know anything). As an aside, Mercedes-Benz and BMW spend millions on car design, safety testing, road tests and R&D (using many consultants and redesigns) to offer cars performing and styled at the very top of the class, for a high but reasonable price. Then some bloke goes into Auto-quik, buys a new spoiler, nitro-inject and sound system (or whatever widget) for $100 and bolts it on and thinks he has 'improved' on the manufacturers efforts. ATB Will A bit blunt, but none of the manufacturers offerings have not been tested e.t.c. to a very high standard. Hi I don't really understand the sense of your post. you seems to try discouraging lads to home built their rebreather. you don't want to home buit ok , you think that it requires a big company to to design a rebrather. So I feel like to respectfully ask you what are you doing on this part of the forum. Home builders exist, and dive their rebreathers. Paul use to be a dolphin and ida modifyer why doubting the capacity of others to do the same ? a home builder can built every parts of a rebreather except the hoses. I've dived home made electronics and home made injection systems for years and at the beginning I was asking stupid questions and gentle lads like dave sutton or gordon smith always took the time to explain things to do it rite. home built sailboat are made everyday by dummies, home built plane are constructed everydays by pilots home made submarine are built by amateur all overthe world. the question is why ? money ? yes it can be a reason, and why not ? yes a home built is cheaper, but in addition it gives you the huge pleasure to do things yourself and a great knoldege of the gear you are diving. there is a balance to find between time to spend to built and test and money to spend. some have time and not enough money, some have the simple garage appeal, they like their workshop, they like to do things themself and they like to dream hours of their future dives even hypothétical dives but anyway. please don't discourage homebuilders just tell them your home buildind experience if you have one. do you have one? I don't want to offence you or paul saying all of that but I had to tell this. a home build forum is in my opinion a place where home builder speak about what they are doing or did and a place where potential future home builders ask the home builders hos to do this , how difficult is it etc.. respectfully yours jean michel __________________ when will I be able to think about something else then spending hours underwater, when will I be normal ? http://web.mac.com/jmurba/Site_2/home.html http://web.mac.com/jmurba/Site_3/home.html
(Offline)

17th April 2008, 15:11	#20 (permalink)
spunkmire New Member Current Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: southeast uk Posts: 17	Re: O2 addition methods My point is, why bother modifying a stock unit, when the original designer (Gordon Smaith or Pau Raymaekers) put a lot of effort into making a good unit, and (no offence to op) they know a lot more about rebreather design (judging by the op's posts) than the op? Homebuild all the way - great stuff- give it a go- -but rejigging a stock unit? BMCL- ok, just some restitching and rerouting- but redesigning the oxygen addition method? Think carefully sir
(Offline)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode