View Poll Results: How many sensors, less than 1 year old, failed on you last year

Voters
206. You may not vote on this poll
  • 0

    113 54.85%
  • 1

    42 20.39%
  • 2

    21 10.19%
  • 3

    13 6.31%
  • more than 3

    17 8.25%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 55

Thread: Sensor failure data

  1. #11
    RBW Member andrespp is on a distinguished road andrespp is on a distinguished road andrespp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cádiz (Spain)
    Posts
    449

    Re: Sensor failure data

    Two sensors Maxtec 305F-

  2. #12
    RBW Member tash is an unknown quantity at this point tash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Dubai
    Posts
    1
    Evo +

    Re: Sensor failure data

    zero

    Swapped late 2012 to n@90 and not a whisper in 2013, if you had asked the year b4 though, that would have been a totally different answer, hence the swap.

  3. #13
    SBOD Pilot Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish is a glorious beacon of light Captain Starfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    836
    AP Classic SBOD v. AV1c

    Re: Sensor failure data

    Three, APD cells. One of them a warranty replacement less than a month old. Another failed high - 200mV plus in air, I didn't know the chemistry even allowed that kind of silliness.

  4. #14
    RBW Member Sambo is an unknown quantity at this point Sambo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Cairns
    Posts
    56
    rEvo Micro FT

    Re: Sensor failure data

    No cell failures. My oldest cells all reading high too. Calibrate fine then read 0.2 higher than the newer cells at depth.

    Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

  5. #15
    RBW Member frankymar is an unknown quantity at this point frankymar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    111
    rEvoIII CE h(e)CCR Rms

    rEvoIII CE hybrid eCCR

    Re: Sensor failure data

    zero Paul

  6. #16
    RBW Member Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P is just really nice Igor P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    713
    TR300c (mCCR)

    Re: Sensor failure data

    Non that meets criteria.

    2 Narked@90 cells 18 months old no problem,
    1 Narked@90 cell 16 months old fall from hands to the floor (my fault) - after that giving slightly higher readings for some time. Replaced with a backup.
    Last edited by Igor P; 19th March 2014 at 14:16.

  7. #17

    Re: Sensor failure data

    VR sensors haven't failed in 1st 2nd nor 3rd year, replaced them anyway...

  8. #18
    Fake Diver Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    842
    Meg

    KISS

    Re: Sensor failure data

    How are you folks determining everything is just fine?

    I just ran all 6 cells I have through my cell checker(vandagraphs), and the 1 year ones all fail (9/12 manufacturer dates, 2 installed just over a year ago, one in May), later ones dont.

    The failing cells graph nice and linear, just current limted at 2.0 to around 94-97mv, versus my newer ones are 105-112mv.

    One friend of mine said at 2.0, less than 100mv, toss'm.

  9. #19
    rEvo's daddy
    paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers has a reputation beyond repute paulraymaekers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    belgium
    Posts
    4,073
    rEvo

    Re: Sensor failure data

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Pack  View Original Post
    How are you folks determining everything is just fine?

    I just ran all 6 cells I have through my cell checker(vandagraphs), and the 1 year ones all fail (9/12 manufacturer dates, 2 installed just over a year ago, one in May), later ones dont.

    The failing cells graph nice and linear, just current limted at 2.0 to around 94-97mv, versus my newer ones are 105-112mv.

    One friend of mine said at 2.0, less than 100mv, toss'm.
    I don't understand... is 50mV in O2 at 1 bar some magic number?
    www.rEvo-rebreathers.com
    ...."Yes you have to pre-breathe to activate the scrubber sorb, anyone who says different doesn't know what they are talking about!"...
    .... to get more accurate CO2 injection in the breathing machine we put 2 mass flow controllers in series ...
    .... The noise is a few tens of nano-volts, so DL were able to reduce the output voltage ...
    .... radial scrubbers give longer dwell time than axials...
    .... the earth is flat and ...

  10. #20
    Fake Diver Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack will become famous soon enough Jeff Pack's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    842
    Meg

    KISS

    Re: Sensor failure data

    All the tests at 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 bar up to 2.0 all are plotted and apparently expect a less than 2% tolerance from some derived number based upon o2 percentage and starting mv in air) or they fail (using N@90 plotter spreadsheet).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts