Affordable Oxygen

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 3:50:11 PM UTC-5, wrote:
The vets my wife and I deal with are better doctors than the doctors we deal with.

Med school is way easier to get in than Veterinary school.

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 2:21:35 PM UTC-8, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 12:44:33 PM UTC-8, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

Using medical O2 for aviation...

I thought we settled this twenty years ago.

https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...elders-oxygen/

Medical, welding, and aviator's breathing oxygen are all produced using the same processes and equipment. Not just similar. They're all the exact same stuff from the same tap.

The only differences are what they're dispensed into and how they're used.. The requirements for purity and cleanliness in all compressed oxygen applications are such that the baseline specifications for all are the same.

--Bob K.

I mis-spoke, I meant to say jury rigging med O2 equipment for a purpose not intended, could be hazardous to one's health. Kind of thought that was implied, forgot an engineer or two populates these pages. I have had hypoxia before during a contest out of INYK. I later realized I had mixed equipment from Aerox and MH. Aerox oxyisaver cannula cannot be used with MH equipment. I would strongly encourage anyone to use the equipment from the manufacturer, read the instructions and not attempt to jury rig a mix of med O2 and aviation O2 equipment.

As long as there's an FAR about Aviator's Breathing Oxygen.Â* Oh, wait...

On 1/24/2020 2:16 PM, wrote:
Using medical O2 for aviation is akin to using a vet for your health care, wrong application. The vet might just shoot you for a broken leg.
There is absolutely NO DIFFERENCE between medical, aviators or welding oxygen. Moisture may be introduced at the delivery device for medical applications, but in the cylinder itself, they are all 99.99% O2. Any moisture in the pressurized cylinder, in the presence of an oxidizer (O2, get it?) promotes corrosion of the aluminum or steel cylinder.

I wonder how long this fairy tale about the "differences" in oxygen will survive?


--
Dan, 5J

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:20:23 PM UTC-6, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 2:21:35 PM UTC-8, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 12:44:33 PM UTC-8, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

Using medical O2 for aviation...

I thought we settled this twenty years ago.

https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...elders-oxygen/

Medical, welding, and aviator's breathing oxygen are all produced using the same processes and equipment. Not just similar. They're all the exact same stuff from the same tap.

The only differences are what they're dispensed into and how they're used. The requirements for purity and cleanliness in all compressed oxygen applications are such that the baseline specifications for all are the same.

--Bob K.

I mis-spoke, I meant to say jury rigging med O2 equipment for a purpose not intended, could be hazardous to one's health. Kind of thought that was implied, forgot an engineer or two populates these pages. I have had hypoxia before during a contest out of INYK. I later realized I had mixed equipment from Aerox and MH. Aerox oxyisaver cannula cannot be used with MH equipment. I would strongly encourage anyone to use the equipment from the manufacturer, read the instructions and not attempt to jury rig a mix of med O2 and aviation O2 equipment.

What/where is INYK? Sorry, can't find it.

At 18:54 25 January 2020, Tom BravoMike wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:20:23 PM UTC-6, Jonathan St.
Cloud wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 2:21:35 PM UTC-8, Bob
Kuykendall wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 12:44:33 PM UTC-8, Jonathan
St. Cloud
wr=
ote:
=20
Using medical O2 for aviation...
=20
I thought we settled this twenty years ago.
=20

https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...3getting-high-
on-welders=
-oxygen/
=20
Medical, welding, and aviator's breathing oxygen are all
produced
using=
the same processes and equipment. Not just similar. They're all
the exact
=
same stuff from the same tap.
=20
The only differences are what they're dispensed into and how
they're
us=
ed. The requirements for purity and cleanliness in all compressed
oxygen
ap=
plications are such that the baseline specifications for all are the
same.
=20
--Bob K.
=20
I mis-spoke, I meant to say jury rigging med O2 equipment for
a purpose
n=
ot intended, could be hazardous to one's health. Kind of thought
that was
=
implied, forgot an engineer or two populates these pages. I have
had
hypox=
ia before during a contest out of INYK. I later realized I had mixed
equip=
ment from Aerox and MH. Aerox oxyisaver cannula cannot be
used with MH
equ=
ipment. I would strongly encourage anyone to use the equipment
from the
ma=
nufacturer, read the instructions and not attempt to jury rig a mix
of med
=
O2 and aviation O2 equipment.

What/where is INYK? Sorry, can't find it.

Inyokern Airport (IATA: IYK, ICAO: KIYK, FAA LID: IYK)

At 18:54 25 January 2020, Tom BravoMike wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:20:23 PM UTC-6, Jonathan St.
Cloud wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 2:21:35 PM UTC-8, Bob
Kuykendall wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 12:44:33 PM UTC-8, Jonathan
St. Cloud
wr=
ote:
=20
Using medical O2 for aviation...
=20
I thought we settled this twenty years ago.
=20

https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...3getting-high-
on-welders=
-oxygen/
=20
Medical, welding, and aviator's breathing oxygen are all
produced
using=
the same processes and equipment. Not just similar. They're all
the exact
=
same stuff from the same tap.
=20
The only differences are what they're dispensed into and how
they're
us=
ed. The requirements for purity and cleanliness in all compressed
oxygen
ap=
plications are such that the baseline specifications for all are the
same.
=20
--Bob K.
=20
I mis-spoke, I meant to say jury rigging med O2 equipment for
a purpose
n=
ot intended, could be hazardous to one's health. Kind of thought
that was
=
implied, forgot an engineer or two populates these pages. I have
had
hypox=
ia before during a contest out of INYK. I later realized I had mixed
equip=
ment from Aerox and MH. Aerox oxyisaver cannula cannot be
used with MH
equ=
ipment. I would strongly encourage anyone to use the equipment
from the
ma=
nufacturer, read the instructions and not attempt to jury rig a mix
of med
=
O2 and aviation O2 equipment.

What/where is INYK? Sorry, can't find it.

Inyokern Airport (IATA: IYK, ICAO: KIYK, FAA LID: IYK)

At 18:54 25 January 2020, Tom BravoMike wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:20:23 PM UTC-6, Jonathan St.
Cloud wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 2:21:35 PM UTC-8, Bob
Kuykendall wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 12:44:33 PM UTC-8, Jonathan
St. Cloud
wr=
ote:
=20
Using medical O2 for aviation...
=20
I thought we settled this twenty years ago.
=20

https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...3getting-high-
on-welders=
-oxygen/
=20
Medical, welding, and aviator's breathing oxygen are all
produced
using=
the same processes and equipment. Not just similar. They're all
the exact
=
same stuff from the same tap.
=20
The only differences are what they're dispensed into and how
they're
us=
ed. The requirements for purity and cleanliness in all compressed
oxygen
ap=
plications are such that the baseline specifications for all are the
same.
=20
--Bob K.
=20
I mis-spoke, I meant to say jury rigging med O2 equipment for
a purpose
n=
ot intended, could be hazardous to one's health. Kind of thought
that was
=
implied, forgot an engineer or two populates these pages. I have
had
hypox=
ia before during a contest out of INYK. I later realized I had mixed
equip=
ment from Aerox and MH. Aerox oxyisaver cannula cannot be
used with MH
equ=
ipment. I would strongly encourage anyone to use the equipment
from the
ma=
nufacturer, read the instructions and not attempt to jury rig a mix
of med
=
O2 and aviation O2 equipment.

What/where is INYK? Sorry, can't find it.

Inyokern Airport (IATA: IYK, ICAO: KIYK, FAA LID: IYK)

What/where is INYK? Sorry, can't find it.

Inyokern Airport (IATA: IYK, ICAO: KIYK, FAA LID: IYK)

Got it, thanks!

ABO is tested for moisture on an individual cylinder basis. Medical O2 is tested for purity on a sample basis (usually one cylinder out of a 20 cylinder line). Industrial O2: each cylinder is sniff tested prior to filling to make sure no flammable gas or other stinky thing is loitering in the cylinder. No testing of industrial grade after filling.

Yes, all are filled from the same liquid O2 tank, all are pumped on the same manifold. However, the compliant filling facility does the above steps because either FAA, FDA, or CGA says that is how to do it.

It's reasonably easy to play safe: have a CGA 540 tank, get a fill from an ABO cascade manifold at the airport. It is not reasonably easy to get a "great price", especially if you fly where there is no ABO manifold available..

Ask anyone who has ever done a decent physics class what happens to moisture when you compress a wet gas. It drops out. That’s why air compressors have moisture traps.

This nonsense about testing for moisture/adding moisture in medical oxygen etc etc never goes away. Compressed oxygen is incredibly dry. Any moisture in a compressed oxygen cylinder would be rolling around the bottom, not in the gas.