Equipment
The Secrets of Scrubbers
Dr. Clarke’s geeky new monograph on the inner workings of rebreather scrubbers represents the culmination and synthesis of more than three decades of Naval research, as well as the personal research of the retired scientific director of the Navy Experimental Diving Unit (NEDU) into stochastic systems. As such, it is arguably a MUST READ for serious rebreather users. Here marine scientist and rebreather instructor Jeffrey Bozanic dives into some of the important details of Clarke’s book and the operational questions it seeks to answer. Feed your head!
By Jeffrey Bozanic PhD. Header image courtesy of Bernie Campoli.
Let me begin this book review of Breakthrough: Revealing the Secrets of Rebreather Scrubber Canisters by John R. Clarke with my conclusion. This is one of the most important works available to rebreather divers. It dispels many unsafe practices and provides a base for making informed decisions. This monograph is a “must read” for all serious users of rebreathers, all rebreather designers, and all rebreather manufacturers.
I began diving rebreathers in 1988, and since that time have accumulated in excess of 2,500 hours in a wide variety of open water conditions. Early on in this time, I began wondering about the truth of “best practices” that were taught to me (and that I have since been teaching), as access to quantifiable and repeatable data was lacking in our civilian/scientific diving communities.
I often wondered about scrubber canisters, one of the intrinsic critical components in any rebreather. How well do they work? What can make them fail? How long will they really last in the environmental conditions I use them in, as opposed to how they are tested? What is the best method for packing canisters? Can canisters be safely used on a dive, stored, and reused? If so, how long may they be stored? Should we modify use time based on such storage? What are the impacts if the canister becomes partially flooded? Are there practices which will extend absorbent efficacy, either during or between dives? Can I modify canister times based on my expected work rate, compared to the work rates simulated during testing? Does my personal size (240 pounds/110 kg) and fitness level suggest that I modify canister use time compared to test standards? What are the implications of using one absorbent grain size versus another? How much does ambient water temperature impact absorbent efficacy? How can I modify my personal use time based on that? And this is but a partial list of questions I have had.
Sure, we all have stock responses to many of these concerns. “Well, we know that absorbent will last longer in the 84oF/29oC water in which I dive, so I just double the manufacturer’s suggested time.” Or “If you bag and label your scrubber after use, you may use it on a future dive.” Most of these responses are based on anecdotal experience or data, so they may not be completely without merit. And most seem to make sense if we think about them hypothetically. But none have been adequately tested or modeled from a scientific perspective.
It’s The Data, Stupid
I mentioned earlier that, “access to quantifiable and repeatable data was lacking in our civilian/scientific diving communities.” In much of the research that I have done, there were indications that such data may have existed in the military community, specifically at the US Navy Experimental Diving Unit (NEDU), where such questions are typically researched to support military divers in completing their missions successfully. However, as a civilian, I did not have or had only limited access to such research documentation. I found this to be extremely frustrating. And it left me curious as well: What do they know that I do not?
Enter John Clarke. John was the Scientific Director at NEDU for 28 years. A physiologist by training, he found himself working with divers, engineers, and mission planners on projects or research designed to validate options for classified operations. Much work revolved around rebreathers, including scrubber canisters. In fact, before this book was published, the manuscript had to be reviewed and approved by the Department of Defense, an uncommon process for most publications, to ensure that it contained no classified information. While there were minor edits made, they allowed the publication to go forward.
You see, John had developed most of the model upon which much of this book is based during his personal time, after hours and at home outside the workplace. While he used the fruits of his labor at NEDU, it was not a NEDU project. But the reality is, John’s work benefitted from his NEDU projects and experience, and the research at NEDU benefitted from John’s extracurricular labor.
To understand the benefits (and limitations) of Breakthrough, you must first understand the differences between some basic concepts: hypotheses, anecdotal information, experiments, and modeling.
Hypotheses, Anecdotes, Experiments, And Modeling
A hypothesis is an idea or thought that you believe could be true. There are two basic types of hypotheses, those that you believe may be correct (true), and those that you set up as “straw men,” hoping that by proving them incorrect that the obverse must then be true. Most people inherently understand the first type of hypothesis. In fact, some people look at some of these hypotheses, and because they seem so inherently reasonable, often consider them to be “true.” An example of this might be the statement that, “The more absorbent you use in a rebreather, the longer you can remain underwater.” This seems reasonable, right? Yet, what about the case in which the ability to dive longer is limited by oxygen supply, and not by absorbent? Or when, even though you have more absorbent, the resultant increase in breathing effort caused by the increase in gas travel path through the absorbent bed leads to increased breathing effort, increased carbon dioxide generation, and consequently reduced dive time? We should not confuse a hypothesis with “truth.” Unfortunately, this is relatively common in the civilian diving world. It requires validation to prove a hypothesis.
Many people believe they can validate a hypothesis with anecdotal data. This is information which may have been observed but may not have been rigorously structured. A common argument heard in the recreational diving sector is, “Well, I did it, and I’m fine.” That argument is often used to justify further deviations from recommended guidelines. This normalization of deviance may continue until a significant adverse incident (such as a fatality) occurs. Even short of such an event, using anecdotal evidence is skewed reasoning.
Consider the example of a rebreather diver using a specific rebreather, the manufacturer’s use guidelines state that their rebreather may be used for three hours in 40oF/4oC water at a VCO2 (metabolic carbon dioxide production rate) of 1.6 LPM (liters per minute). The diver recognizes that their typical workload during a dive produces much less carbon dioxide than that, and that they dive in the Caribbean Sea at much warmer temperatures. So they hypothesize that they can dive longer than three hours, and “test” that hypothesis by conducting a dive of four hours. Surviving that dive, their next dive is five hours, and so on until they are diving their rebreather for ten hours on the scrubber. Obviously, the manufacturer must have been overly conservative in their guidelines, correct?
The fallacies with using this type of anecdotal evidence to “prove” their hypothesis are many. The diver’s workloads are not consistent during the dives, and results from one dive will not match another. Water temperature varies seasonally, with depth, and often with location, due to currents and other factors. Depths were almost certainly not constant, impacting gas density and scrubber efficacy. Finally, there was no means of objectively determining the partial pressure or percentage of carbon dioxide in the breathing loop at any given time, other than, “I felt OK.”
My personal research has shown that divers will not notice a 5% CO2 level in a breathing loop over a short time, where 0.5% is considered a “safe” limit. All we learn from the body of anecdotal evidence from our diver is that he survived what may have been hundreds of hours of “testing” and “proof” of his personal guideline.
The only way to prove a hypothesis is through experimentation. Experiments are tests in which all variables are tightly constrained, so that the impact of any single variable (like the time a scrubber will last) is well understood and defined. If conducted properly, the results are consistent and repeatable. In the previous example, multiple trials of duration would be conducted, constraining water temperature to 84oF/29oC, depth to 130 fsw/40 msw, VCO2 to 1.2 LPM, and having a way to actually measure when PCO2 reaches 0.5% SEV, as one example. We would then need to run this same set of constraints multiple times to see that we are getting consistent results, before changing one of the independent variables and repeating the experiment again.
The problem with experimentation is that it is time consuming, and expensive. Also, some observations we might wish to make (like seeing the inside of a scrubber real time) is not possible. Modeling allows us to circumvent these issues by establishing a set of mathematical equations that simulate what occurs in real life. This would allow us to predict results if we dove in those actual conditions. Modeling is limited by how well we can establish the mathematical formulas that we use for predictions, the granularity (fineness) of the model, and the processing power and time available. Models are validated and revised based on experimental results and occasionally anecdotal data.
Breakthrough uses all of the above approaches for considering scrubbers. However, much of the predictive information and discussion arise from models that John has built, which have consequently been refined and improved upon using the experimental data from his years of research at NEDU. While this information is new and interesting, it did not answer all of the questions I asked above, and may leave you wondering with your own specific questions. That said, I still found the book illuminating, and in some cases downright scary. The remainder of this review I am going to spend highlighting a few concepts and results from the text that I found particularly engaging.
Before I begin, one last observation: John’s goal was to provide relevant information, not just for divers, but also for theorists, engineers, and physicists. The book is based in large part on math. I have had several years of calculus and statistics in the course of my academic studies and still found some of the math to be above my head. Do not let that dissuade you from reading it. Even if you do not understand the math, John’s discussion generally highlights the importance of what he is trying to explain with the math, and the diagrams help as well. If you get to a part of the manuscript where the math is daunting, just skip over it and resume your reading when you get past the numbers.
A Study In Variability
In many respects, the book is a study in variability. How does the real world vary from theory? How do variations in constraints impact scrubber performance? What role does environmental variability play in scrubber efficacy? When may small, seemingly inconsequential variances have a large impact on final results? How does physiological variability impact scrubber performance? And what should we do to increase dive safety based on this information?
Revelations began on the very first page of the text. Examples here, and on pages 3 and other locations, discussed problems with the actual absorbent products provided by different manufacturers. Contaminated absorbent, mislabeling, grain size variations, and extrusions could or were all impacting scrubber performance for divers. I had never considered that there could be defects in the actual absorbent that were undetectable by cursory visual examination.
An engineering concept that John stressed in the book and that I had seen before—but was not really familiar with—was propagation of error. While mentions of it are made throughout the book, the most concise discussion was on pages 45-52. In this example, the potential impact of physiological uncertainty and conversion of metabolic oxygen consumption to carbon dioxide by any given diver, means that breakthrough could occur much sooner than the published limits, in this case, it’s likely to be a 13% shorter duration. What John is saying is that during manned dives, breakthrough can occur well before unmanned test limits indicate.
This is scary! Putting it another way, in 17 out of 100 dives, the PCO2 would exceed 2% SEV, (a generally accepted “safe” value when diving a helmet, but not α rebreather) within the published time, a value four times than expected. In actual field practice, we make the exact opposite assumption, based on differences between test water temperature of 40oF/4oC and our dive environment temperature (warmer), and anticipated VO2 and VE being less than test standards. The point here is that I have always regarded published canister limits as conservative and to be regarded as a starting point for determining a reasonable dive time on a scrubber. This may not be true. Later in the same section, using a different set of covariance data, he demonstrates that a diver may reach a 2% SEV level as often as one dive in five (about 20% of the time) due to propagation of error effects.
Having worked with statistics to evaluate my own research data on many past projects, I am quite familiar with confidence intervals and prediction limits. However, I had never considered them with respect to scrubber performance. The same figure indicated a reduction in time of 20% at some temperatures, when a 95% prediction limit was considered. Page 50, Table 4, provides data on high and low COV and indicates that there is a 1 in 42 chance of breathing 6.3% CO2, when aiming to conclude a dive at 0.5% CO2. I found this astounding. I think John summarized it best on Page 54, “Being able to safely dive to a single published canister duration, such as 180 minutes, is a fantasy.” This discussion also indicates to me that we in the diving community would be much better served if the manufacturers providing us with canister limits also provided confidence limits with those figures.
Respiratory exchange ratio (RER) is a measure of how much CO2 is produced based on the amount of oxygen consumed. I had always considered a value of 0.8 to be typical for this, although I was aware that it varied, particularly with diet. However, the Navy uses a value of 0.9 for their standard, and some experiments conducted by the Navy resulted in a RER of 1.07 (Page 16, “VCO2 was 1.4-1.9 LPM, and VO2 was 1.21-1.77 LPM.”) In other words, the divers were producing more CO2 than they were consuming oxygen! This has obvious implications for the rebreather user.
The Power of Modeling
In Chapter 5, John begins the discussion of the model he has developed for predicting scrubber performance. He explains the parameters and how the model evolved as he used it. The diagrams are quite interesting and are an important stepping stone to understanding the discussion in Chapter 6 on cold soaked scrubbers and other applications.
One section titled “Decoupling Work and Ventilation” on Page 75 considers hypoventilation. This is a common practice as many experienced open circuit divers often train themselves to hypoventilate (“skip breath”) as a technique for conserving gas. This practice may be contraindicated when using rebreathers, but the habit is so ingrained due to muscle memory that the diver is unaware of it. In the experimental setting discussed on the following page, the practice directly resulted in the diver passing out while under water from high end tidal CO2. This may, in fact, be related to “deep water blackout” that has led to fatalities in some deep water cave dives.
One of the things I needed to keep in mind was that these chapters dealt with modeling, not actual dive operations. I found it enticing to think of applying this information to my personal diving habits. For example, on Page 95, he states, “The simulation ran about 3.5 times longer in the warmer temperature before canister breakthrough.” It would be easy to use this as justification of extending canister use to 3.5 times the manufacturer recommended limit. However, John then goes on to caution the reader that these are model results, and should not be used to plan real world dives. That warning should be kept in mind while evaluating all of the modeling results. Modeling indicates possibilities that then need experimental validation prior to adopting for actual dive applications.
Page 97 begins a discussion of Macroscale Variability. Translated, John is referring to whether the canister is completely filled with absorbent. Practically, what is being discussed is how well the canister is packed with granular (loose) absorbent, a critical skill in any rebreather training class. Unfortunately, we have no means of objectively determining if we have accomplished this vital task adequately. Perhaps weighing the final packed canister is the best alternative, but few divers do this on a regular basis. However, John shows in Figure 70 that with only a 99% fill compared to a full fill, there is a possibility of as much as a 35% loss in duration before breakthrough.
This is an astounding number, and emphasizes how important proper canister filling is to the real world diver. It is also a strong argument, in my opinion, for the utilization of prepacked canisters (like those used with Poseidon rebreathers), or solid absorbents (like Micropore’s ExtendAir cartridges).
I have always believed that long pre-breathe times (>30 seconds) were unnecessary as part of pre-dive preparations, given water temperatures of 50oF/10oC or warmer. The data plotted on Page 120, Figure 88, seems to support that hypothesis. What I did not expect, however, was his discussion on Pages 119-122 highlighting the initial scrubber failure in cold soaked canisters, followed by an initial effectiveness in absorbing carbon dioxide, followed minutes later by complete scrubber failure. This highlights the importance of managing cold soaked canisters effectively, including pre-breathing protocols. In Antarctica, we used a 5-minute pre-breath protocol, with no noticeable failure in canister efficacy once the dives began, while diving in 28.6oF/-1.8oC water.
The section on Absorbent Granule Size Distributions (Pages 124-130) returned to a theme introduced on Page 1, variability in absorbent as provided by the manufacturer. You do not always get what you think you are getting. Two other points struck me as particularly important here. The first dealt with friability, or the tendency of absorbent granules to break into smaller particles. I have personally found this to be problematic operationally with some absorbents, including Draeger’s DiveSorb. The other point made in this section was the use by some recreational rebreather divers of absorbents other than those recommended by the manufacturers. This issue has been a long-held concern of mine. In this discussion, John pointedly discussed the use of Spherasorb (a medical absorbent used in anesthesia machines) in place of Molecular Products’ Sofnolime, the manufacturer recommended absorbent for use in their rebreathers (Page 128). Experimentation by Duke and New Zealand researchers showed that time to breakthrough using medical grade Spherasorb was significantly less than when using Sofnolime.
The section labeled Pre-Dive Decision Making is especially important to rebreather users (beginning Page 133). The variables discussed in this section have a direct bearing on real world diving decisions. Topics covered include selection of a fine grain versus a larger grain absorbent, breathing resistance, pressure drop across an absorbent bed, breathing resistance limits, and other physiologic considerations in rebreather use. I will just say to the divers in the audience… “Read it!”
As I read the discussion on gas density and physiologic interactions, I was left with a single question: “Why am I still alive?” My deepest dive depth on air was 86 mfw/280 ffw (not planned—chasing another cave diver who was impaired from narcosis, and who had exceeded the planned depth of 67 mfw/220 ffw). I consciously avoided any work at all, relying on overweighting to bring me down and lift from my BC to bring me up again. This section highlighted that I have been extremely lucky in some of my past dives.
On Page 149, John repeats a question posed to him, “Which is more lethal for rebreather divers, breathing resistance or CO2?” His response: “It’s both!” This statement pointed out the fact that, as rebreather divers, we cannot focus on any single aspect of threat or danger while using this equipment. To focus on one to the exclusion of others engenders risk that may be excessive. We have to focus on multiple variables and manage multiple variables, continually, while diving.
In Conclusion
Conclusions are presented in Chapter 8. This is a concise summary of the major findings in the book. While “skipping to the end of the book” to read these findings gets some of the major concepts across and may give you a feel for some of the material presented, it is not a substitute for reading the manuscript. The discussions, developmental arguments, and conclusions placed in the framework of the modeling and experimentation are well worth reading.
The remainder of the book is a series of Appendices that provide additional supportive data and information, including additional advanced math. John has promised to provide an even deeper review of some of the material in the form of an eBook Supplement that should soon be available and linked to on his website.
These were the sections that I found of interest, but probably because they were based on my personal experiences. I have no doubt that different readers will find other points John makes that engage them more than they do me. There is a wealth of information here, and it is difficult to grasp it all in a single reading.
Overall, I feel this is an excellent book with well-considered points based on experimental data, as well as modeling. It is a valuable addition to any rebreather user’s library.
Dive Deeper
InDEPTH: Too Much to Absorb: What You Need to Know About Your Scrubber by Reilly Fogarty (2020)
InDEPTH: Estimating Your Scrubber Duration
InDEPTH: InDepth’s Holiday Rebreather Guide: 2022 Update
InDEPTH: How Deep Is Your Library?
Jeffrey Bozanic PhD is a technical diving instructor and research scientist. Based in southern California, Jeff provides consulting and training services in the diving market. Specializing in rebreather use, he is probably best known for his seminal textbook on the topic, Mastering Rebreathers, and his work as senior Technical Editor for the 6th Edition of the NOAA Diving Manual.
A marine scientist, Jeff has participated or lead over 60 diving expeditions during the past 40 years, to places like Palau, Africa, Tonga, and Mexico. From 1989-1992 he oversaw scientific diving operations in Antarctica for the U.S. Antarctic Program, including co-authoring the Antarctic Scientific Diving Manual. In 2016 he was part of a research team that tested and evaluated rebreathers in Antarctica for the National Science Foundation.
Jeff has served on many Boards, including as NSS-CDS Chairman, NAUI Vice Chairman, and AAUS Treasurer. He has been honored with the NAUI Lifetime Achievement Award, DAN/Rolex Diver of the Year, and AAUS Conrad Limbaugh Award for Scientific Diving Leadership.
Equipment
Configure Me This: The Annotated Sidemounter
We make a deep dive into the world of sidemount diving, and examine seven leading sidemount systems with guest editors Steve Davis and Stratis Kas.
This feature was created by Steve Davis, Stratis Kas and Michael Menduno. Introduction by Michael Menduno. Special thanks to Michael Thomas and brand representatives who helped us. Cover collage by SJ Alice Bennett with photos by Jason Brown of Bardo and Stratis Kas. Images by Stratis Kas unless noted.
🎶 Pre-dive Clicklist: Dave Brubeck – Take Five 🎶
At last, I am pleased to present InDEPTH’s long awaited sidemount edition, which has been in the works for over a year. The purpose of the issue is to celebrate the art and practice, as well as the equipment and culture of sidemount diving. Call it, “The Joys of Sidemount.” But whether you already follow the Bogarthian way, or simply regard it all as “widemount,” I promise you there is something for you in this issue.
The seed of an idea for a sidemount issue grew out of two things: First was the popularity and interest of our NOV 2021 feature that celebrated our innate gear headedness: “Annotated Tekkie,” which examined the question of what and how much kit is required to safely explore our underwater world. Diving is a technology-dependent activity to be sure.
Second, was, that we’ve been seeing tremendous growth and interest in sidemount diving we’ve been seeing. Like technical diving itself, what started in the cave community with small groups of experienced divers experimenting with DIY sidemount configs some three plus decades ago, has now blossomed into a mainstream, commercial tech diving activity in both cave and open water. Sidemount diving has now even spilled over into recreational diving—the configurational equivalent of recreational nitrox in the era of tech mixed gas diving.
One of the important inflection points was bringing sidemount diving out of the caves where the configuration was born, into open water. Sidemount pioneer Jeff Loflin was one of the individuals instrumental in bringing sidemount to recreational divers and the open water tech community. He explained it this way to me in our interview, “We were taking sidemount from the dark, and bringing it into the light.”
“We were taking sidemount from the dark, and bringing it into the light.”—Jeff Loflin
Interestingly, over the last decade, sidemount rebreathers, used as both a primary or a bailout, or both, have also gained significant traction driven by innovative vendors like KISS/XDEEP, SF2, Divesoft, and others. In fact, seven vendors are currently producing sidemount rebreathers. Note that we have also seen an increase in the number of chest-mounted units that can be integrated with sidemount systems. However, we decided to focus on open circuit sidemount for the purpose of this issue, andl address sidemount rebreathers at a later date.
Today, virtually all of the tech diving agencies offer open sidemount courses, with the possible exception of NAUITEC. For example, these range from “Intro to Tech” level sidemount courses, at RAID, which are aimed at getting divers into sidemount at the beginning of their tech journey. At the other end of the spectrum, Global Underwater Explorers (GUE) only offers a cave sidemount course to those who have completed GUE’s advanced cave training (Cave 2) and have at least 50 post-class cave dives.
Similarly, the majority of the major recreational agencies offer a recreational sidemount class for open water divers, including CMAS, NAUI, PADI, RAID, SDI, and SSI. Collectively, these agencies are issuing thousands of certifications a year.
So how big is sidemount diving? Good question, right?!?
How big is tech diving?!? We don’t really know. As an industry we suffer from a severe case of data insufficiency syndrome (DIS). [We can combat this—see our survey below!] However, in speaking with insiders involved in the sidemount business, some rough comparisons emerged.
Sidemount diving is likely bigger than rebreather diving, which according to estimates presented at Rebreather Forum 4 in April, likely represents about 15-20,000 divers globally. This seems like a plausible estimate given the significant cost difference, familiarity with the equipment, and perhaps greater accessibility to training and equipment with open circuit sidemount compared to rebreathers.
Another comparison: sidemount diving is likely bigger than cave diving! “Sidemount is not just used for cave diving anymore, but I would say that at least 80% of cave divers have at least tried, or have sidemount in their tool kit. Fifty percent or more dive it exclusively,” Dive Rite general manager Jared Hires explained. Add in tech sidemount diving in open water and wrecks, and the growing number recreational sidemount divers, and we are likely to arrive at what sidemount instructor Steve Davis of Sidemount Pros estimates as “Cave divers plus some.”
On the recreational side, a PADI exec told InDEPTH that PADI’s Sidemount Standard Specialty is now as popular as its Dry Suit Specialty, which is PADI’s third most popular Specialty Diver course, behind Enriched Air (Nitrox) Diver and Deep Diver, and ahead of Peak Performance Buoyancy. No drills on the knees, puhleez! I kid our friends at PADI.
Despite its growth and relative new-found prominence, sidemount still remains a kind of a best kept secret—the elephant in the restriction?—by which I mean many tekkies (including myself until recently) lack awareness and working knowledge of sidemount diving and may not have even tried it.
Not surprising divers being what they are, even among sidemount instructors and users, there’s a range of opinions on its use and application. On one hand, some view sidemount as a specific tool to be used exclusively for diminutive karst cave, on the other, many consider sidemount more of a platform choice. In fact, Davis, who you’ll hear more about in a minute, offered this question and assertion in our interview, Speaking Sidemount, and then went on and made his case:
“Is backmount the best tool for cave diving? No, it’s not. Sidemount is far and away the best tool for cave diving!”—Steve Davis
Certainly, many including GUE, would challenge this assertion. But on the other hand, who died and left legacy twinsets in charge? Jacques Cousteau? Is backmount intrinsically safer? Does it offer better performance? If so, please share the data with everyone. There is room for respectful debate. Of course, every platform has its strengths and weaknesses, and environmental conditions, and individual physical and preference differences play an important role in choosing the appropriate platform. However, because of the lack of awareness, knowledge, and direct experience in the overall diving community, the limitations of sidemount get exaggerated, and its application, perhaps, under appreciated.
“There’s absolutely nothing I can’t do in sidemount that you can do in doubles, and there are a shit ton of things that I can do in sidemount, that you can’t do in doubles.”—Edd Sorenson
As instructor trainer and cave rescuer Edd Sorenson explains in his Who’s Who interview, “People used to tell me all the time all the things I couldn’t do in sidemount, and still do. ‘You can’t dive off a boat, you can’t do this, you can’t do that, you can’t scooter, you can’t double stage, you can’t quad.’ I would tell everybody the same thing. There’s absolutely nothing I can’t do in sidemount that you can do in doubles, and there are a shit ton of things that I can do in sidemount, that you can’t do in doubles.” Note in his interview Sorenson recounts taking GUE founder and president Jarrod Jablonski for his first sidemount dive. A trust me dive with Edd? Trust me, you don’t want to miss it.
Not surprising, it seems that many, or most of the dedicated sidemount divers we spoke to for this issue (See: The Who’s Who of Sidemount Diving) offered some version of the following, and or, would likely agree with this meme:
Once You Go Side, You’ll Always Dive Wide.
Ha! I kid our backmount sisters and brothers. None the less, it’s clear that sidemount is here to stay!
Now I’m not a sidemount diver, yet (it’s on my list), and only one member of InDEPTH’s team dives sidemount, in caves. So, to help us with the issue, we enlisted the help of two sidemount experts to serve as guest editors. We reached out to New Zealand-based sidemount instructor, ambassador, and host of the “Speaking Sidemount” podcast Steve Davis, principal of Sidemount Pros. We also enlisted the help of Greek photographer/filmmaker, author, long time InDEPTH contributor, and cave and sidemount instructor, the inimitable Mr. Stratis Kas. Both of them helped with the selection people and sidemount systems we planned to highlight, and authored content for the issue.
Beginning with this lead story, “Configure Me This,” we explore seven recognized and storied sidemount systems, all of them a little different. Who knew there were that many? In contrast, it’s fair to say, backmount configs have generally become fairly standardized in the global tech community. Please note, that the majority of models are shown wearing their personalized branded gear not necessarily stock products.
Next, we offer the perspectives and stories of 34 leaders in the field, in a piece titled, “The Who’s Who of Sidemount Diving.” We also dive into the philosophy, culture, and practice of sidemount diving in “Speaking Sidemount” and “The What, Which and Why of Sidemount Diving’‘ with our guest editors.
In addition, we offer A Brief History Sidemount Diving with Lamar Hires, Bill Renaker and Patrick Widmann, and specifically the evolution of cold water vs warm water sidemount titled, “The Evolution of Sidemount System Design: Two Distinct Paths Shaped by Florida and Mexico,” by sidemount instructor and author Andy Davis. Finally, the issue wouldn’t be complete with a bit of DIY sidemount heresy from long time scuba engineer and troublemaker, Dave Mclean, call it Sidemount Heresy! Trust me, you’ll be better for the exposure!
Here then is InDEPTH’s celebration of sidemount diving and culture. We want to thank our forward thinking sponsors: DAN Europe, Dive Rite, Divesoft, Fourth Element, Halcyon, Shearwater and XDEEP for making this issue possible. We also want to thank Nicole Alarid, Orie Braun, Jared Hires, Nick Hollis, Michael Thomas, and Patrick Widmann, who helped us sort out sidemount configurations and Elena Vivaldo for researching recreational sidemount. And of course, we want to thank our models: Robert Thomas (CDG), Ricardo Castillo (Dive Rite), Emöke Wagner (Halcyon), Melodie Trevino (Hollis), Marcelin Nebenhaus (Razor), Mélissa Bezaz (Toddy) and Tamara Adame (XDEEP). Looking good divers! We do plan to create a free downloadable poster from this issue. Watch this space!
Please note, we realize this issue primarily represents the views of advocates who are making a case for sidemount. We haven’t focused on stories of divers who have had bad experiences with sidemount or spent much ink delving into its downsides, to the extent that these exist. Consequently, I invite readers who feel so moved to submit their views and or experience, call it, “The Trouble With Sidemount … ” or “Never Do This is Sidemount..” . I’m joking about the titles but serious otherwise. We will happily run thoughtful stories. Let’s get a conversation going.
Finally, we would like to acknowledge that as human diving journalists and artists on deadline, we have likely made errors and omissions, and/or failed to identify important items that our geeky readers will no doubt discover. Our apologies in advance. If you do find any errors, omissions, or needed tweaks, please let us know, and we will endeavor make corrections. Thank you.—Michael Menduno/M2
Please take a minute and complete our new: Sidemount Diving Survey. We will report the results in a coming issue.
Use the following navigation links to dive into your favorite configurations
Halcyon ZERO GRAVITY™ Sidemount System
Cave Diving Group (CDG) Sidemount System
The CDG sidemount system has evolved many times since the 1960s but it’s still a lightweight system for diving sump’s generally found after significant dry caving. The important thing to remember is that it is not just one system. Each diver will have a slightly differently made harness but basically doing the same thing.
Weight System
- Traditionally the weights go around the waist on a CDG harness, a more modern version of the CDG harness such as the RMTD harness (in the photo) weights can be fitted down the spine.
Harness
- The harness itself is a simple design with minimal adjustment but designed to walk or cave while wearing wetsuits and small cylinders. It can also be used with larger cylinders. Steel cylinders are the norm for uk cave diving. The harness has fixed D rings and no sliding D rings for use with Aluminium cylinders.
- Some CDG harnesses are adapted to use with vertical access equipment (SRT) so the caver/diver can descend the vertical dry cave then use the same harness to dive.
BCD/Wing
- The CDG harness has no wing, because generally buoyancy is not required when using wetsuits and small cylinders in sumps. It was common for divers in British Sumps when using drysuits to use the suit for buoyancy and use no wing. In more recent years a small wrap around wing such as the X deep classic or home made equivalent can be easily added if the diver is using bigger cylinders or carrying equipment through the sump to further dry cave exploration and requires buoyancy.
Commentary
The CDG harness is designed to take weight loading on the divers’ shoulders and hips. Karabiners are generally used for attaching cylinders to the harness. A bolt snap is not a weight loading piece of equipment and should not be used to lower equipment down and then up vertical sections of dry cave, karabiners also work when covered in mud or grit! It’s not a harness that will get cylinders in that perfect internet trim but it is a harness designed to explore flooded cave sections found a long way underground. All modern harnesses took the sidemount system from the original Cave Diving Group harness design.
Dive Rite Nomad Ray
The Nomad Ray is the latest sidemount system offering from Dive Rite. It includes a number of notable upgrades to the Nomad range and was designed to be easily adjustable, suitable for a range of body types and diving applications, including the use of both steel and aluminum cylinders.
Weight System
- The Nomad Ray has three padded, internal pockets each of which can hold up to 5 lbs/2.3 kg of either hard or soft weight.
- The weight pockets are located on the back of the wing and accessed via a zipper, making for easy weight adjustments while fitted.
Harness
- The harness consists of independent shoulder, waist/hip, and crotch straps each of which are adjustable to fit the system to a variety of diver body types.
- The harness incorporates custom hardware including two fixed angled D-rings on the shoulders, two fixed angled D-rings on the waist/hip strap plus, two sliding waist D-rings, two chest bungee-retainer slides, two rear drop D-rings for primary tank attachment, and one “dog-bone” crotch strap double D-ring for accessories, plus a DPV D-ring.
- The harness is in Y configuration and attaches to the BCD/wing via woven D-rings at the top and through woven loops and screwed connection at the bottom.
- For the fashion conscious, the wing comes in six colors.
BCD/Wing
- The BCD wing is shaped to provide lift at the lower lumbar region. It comprises a Denier outer shell with an inner bladder and has 42 lbs/19 kg of lift.
- The upper backside panel is abrasion-resistant for restrictions.
- It incorporates a standard inflator that can be routed from the left (standard) or right side.
- The BCD includes two pull dumps which are also OPVs. One is located at the inside top center of the wing with a left shoulder pull dump activated via a sheathed cord. The second is located at the bottom left of the wing. The locations of the dumps may require an alteration of diver position to dump all of the gas from the wing e.g. roll to the right to dump from the left side lower dump. Note this would also align with dumping gas from a drysuit.
- “Belly-band” bungees locate and wrap the outer wing extremities to the diver’s body. The bungee includes a bungee hook attachment and two wing grommets for easy and quick adjustments by simply moving an overhand knot on the bungee.
Commentary
The Nomad Ray is a significant upgrade for Dive Rite and evolving to meet the needs of modern sidemount divers. In particular, the easy-access weight system, shoulder dump, easy-to-adjust “belly-bungee,” plus the method of attaching the harness and the independent crotch strap to the wing, are notable improvements.
Halcyon ZERO GRAVITY™ Sidemount System
Halcyon’s Zero Gravity sidemount system was a collaborative creation with our Mexico distributor, Zero Gravity. The Zero Gravity system puts the buoyancy over the hips and along the sides of the rib cage where buoyancy is desired. Extremely streamlined, the air chamber positioning gives it a flat profile on the back of the diver. The Zero Gravity is suited for double aluminum 80’s and a wetsuit or small steel cylinders used with dry suits and heavier undergarments. The Zero Gravity features an adjustable harness, and an optional weight pouch that will hold up to 15 lbs./6.8 kg, and optional inflator placements on the right or left side.
Weight System
- The added weight attachment is designed and built to lay on the diver’s back in line with the spine. Like our traditional weight options, this allows the diver to keep perfect trim while adding weight. With the three-pocket design, you can add up to 5 lbs/2.3 kg in each pocket as needed and disperse them at different placements for that balanced distribution. The velcro additions allow for secure storage and keep even soft lead pouches from moving around while diving.
Harness
- A harness system with multiple point adjustment is styled after the standard backplate harness, with the lower portion of the strap going behind the diver, allowing for greater freedom of movement and comfort, especially for the women in the diving. This harness system is easily changeable when needed over time, allowing the diver to modify the colors of the webbing if desired for personal customization.
- The newly redesigned door handles provide divers with several options when choosing the right cylinders and placement. With the added grommets, the diver can adjust the door handles into three different locations on the back, as is, higher, or in towards the diver’s back. This placement is essential when setting up the cylinders. The added feature of using curved door handles over traditional square door handles is that when the cylinders are clipped to the system, the bolt snaps do not snag or get hung up in a corner. This keeps the cylinders and the bolt snaps in a free space for easy reaching, clipping, and removing as needed throughout the dive.
- The adjustable bungees make it easy to use with different regulator configurations, whether the regulator is pointed up or down. The waist strap D-rings on the right and left hip allow for AL80’s to be clipped forward as they become buoyant. We achieve this with a non-fixed D-ring by adding an O-ring to the design. This allows the D-ring to be in an upright position for easy finding and clipping while at the same time allowing the D-ring to move freely if in a tight passage or corridor without becoming a snag point.
- The uniquely positioned cylinder bungee runs across the back of the system and diver giving you more stretch when wrapping your valves while keeping your cylinders high, tight, and secure. This placement of the bungee allows the diver to adjust the bungee length very easily, whether in training or for the more experienced sidemount divers. This bungee is very easy to change out by the user if they prefer a lighter or heavier bungee without compromising the design of the system.
BCD/Wing
- The streamlined design with a unique U-shaped bladder provides an almost free and clean back that reduces your profile and drag. The U-shaped bladder allows stable, uniform lifting along each side of the diver where they need it and across the rear of the diver so they have adequate lifting potential without sacrificing profile and trim. This keeps the profile of the diver very low enabling them to access smaller passages without rubbing the bladder. Top to bottom while trim position does not change even as the bladder is fully inflated. This was a key component in the design for low-profile passages and doorways.
Commentary
“As an avid sidemount diver and explorer in North Florida, I have used a variety of side mount systems on the market. It wasn’t until I dived the Zero Gravity system, that I was able to pass through several low passage tunnels without feeling the top of the system scraping along the way. The low profile of the system, even when fully inflated, allowed me as the diver, to keep a low profile in the cave system. This truly became a game changer when it came to exploring new tunnels.” – Orie Braun, Halcyon Sales Manager
Hollis Katana 2
The Katana 2 is the latest sidemount offering from Hollis and brings them into line with the other top contenders in the sidemount space.
Designed with support from cave explorer Edd Sorenson, the Katana 2 incorporates a number of innovative features including a “Quick-Fit” system for easy adjustment, the ability to configure as a H or Y style harness, out of the box support for the KISS Sidewinder, and a BCD top dump valve with shoulder pull.
Weight System
- The Katana 2 weight system features a drop-in Velcro pouch design with 4 x 5 lbs/2.3 kg pockets along the spine. The spine positioning of the weight system can assist with trim adjustment as required.
Harness
- The Katana 2 sidemount harness features an innovative “QFS” Quick Fit System which allows users to easily tailor the one-size-fits-all harness to their specific size.
- The design also allows for either an “H” or “Y” style harness configuration. H-style is most commonly used when donning the system in a drysuit and can be less restrictive, while the Y-style is most similar to a backplate configuration and provides a snug but comfortable fit when properly sized. Both are suitable for various types of diving and user preferences.
- The Katana 2 is the first harness with attachment loops built-in to support the popular KISS Sidewinder CCR and similar units now in the marketplace.
BCD/Wing
- The wing lift capacity is 40 lbs/18 kg and features a tapered design to keep the diver profile as low as possible, without the “turtle shell effect” which causes drag.
- The top of the wing is two-
Commentary
“The coolest thing about the Katana 2 is the way it ships out of the box. You can customize it to your preference thanks to the innovative harness and adaptable wing design. Technical divers love to customize their gear … and they can make all of the adjustments themselves without permanent modifications on this rig.” – Hollis Brand Manager, Nick Hollis
Razor
The Razor Harness embodies simplicity and elegance with just two continuous pieces of webbing and one closure point. Its design is minimalistic, yet strong, rugged, and reliable. The harness offers a comfortable and custom fit for divers of all sizes, thanks to its quick and easy setup and adjustable, standardized hardware.
Weight System
- The Razor Harness allows precise placement of weights for optimizing trim. Additional weights can be easily added to the Razor Pocket Weight, the Waist Strap, or both if more than 13 lbs/6 kg are needed.
Harness
- All attachment points, such as D Rings, on the Razor Harness can be swiftly and easily adjusted for personalized equipment placement. Each Shoulder Strap/Waist Strap can be adjusted at the Mini Back Plate.
- The length of the Lumbar/Crotch Strap can be adjusted at the Delta Shoulder Plate. The height of the Waist/Hip strap can be adjusted at the Mini Back Plate. Extra attachment points can be added if necessary.
BCD/Wing
- The BCD/wing is simple to use and attach or detach from the Razor Harness, secured by just two button head bolts. The mounting position can be easily adjusted to accommodate different-sized divers.
- The wing is exceptionally durable, constructed with three layers: two outer layers of abrasion-resistant 1000 denier ballistic nylon with a layer of heavy gauge polyurethane in between. The wing is ultrasonically welded, and all edges are finished with edging tape. All attachment points feature reinforced grommets for added strength.
- The primary wing provides 45 lbs/20 kg of lift and is equipped with a low-profile, heavy-duty manual dump/OPV valve from DSS, along with a standard power inflator. This allows inflation of the primary wing either using the power inflator or orally.
- The fittings for the dump valve and corrugated hose/power inflator are interchangeable, enabling divers to use them on either the left or right side of the wing according to their preference.
- The Redundant wing also provides 45 lbs/20 kg of lift and is fitted with a very low-profile “coin” dump/OPV valve and oral inflator.
Commentary
The Razor Harness and BCD/Wing system offers divers a sleek and minimalist design without compromising on functionality or durability. Its simple yet robust construction provides a comfortable and secure fit for divers of all sizes. The weight system allows for precise weight distribution to optimize trim, while the adjustable attachment points offer personalized equipment placement. The BCD/wing is easy to attach and remove, and its rugged three-layer construction ensures long-lasting performance. With interchangeable fittings and low-profile valves, the system offers versatility and convenience. Overall, the Razor system combines simplicity, reliability, and versatility, making it an excellent choice for divers seeking a streamlined and efficient diving experience.
Toddy Style
The Toddy Style Sidemount System offers divers a unique and innovative approach to sidemount diving. Its “sandwich” style weight system, adjustable harness, and thoughtful design elements enhance comfort, balance, and ease of use. With the ability to customize weight distribution, easily adjust harness straps, and utilize specialized clips, this system provides divers with a streamlined and efficient sidemount experience. The Toddy Style Sidemount System is a reliable choice for divers seeking enhanced maneuverability and minimal drag during their underwater explorations.
Weight System
- The “sandwich” style system consists of a thin backplate that holds the wing together while protecting it from accidental restriction impact. A backmount-style backplate finishes the sandwich-style system. These backplates also act as a weight system. If the user desires, additional backplates can be added, fitting perfectly on top of each other and distributing the weight evenly over the diver’s back, rather than concentrating it on the spine. This allows for better balance and reduces the “rotation” effect.
- For divers who want to travel with the system, there is a more traditional sidemount weight system. It consists of a weight holder that can be added to the backplate, again placed away from the spine, to enhance balance and minimize the “rotation” effect.
- Finally, there is a flexible butt extension with a special mount for precise addition of weight to achieve optimal trim.
Harness
- The system’s shoulder straps are easily adjustable using a Velcro system that secures it in place with wide elastic wraps.
- The shoulder straps are connected by a removable bungee that keeps them in place when divers turn on their side. It also acts as a temporary clipping place for items such as pigtail marker clips, lights, etc.
BCD/Wing
- The inflator extends from behind, near the neck area, resembling the position in a backmount system. There is no valve, but instead, a direct, extremely durable, and resistant connector. This eliminates a fragile point present in all other systems.
- The wing’s bladder is easily accessible and can be changed even in the field.
Regulator accessories
- The system also utilizes custom-made clips for the regulator’s second stages. These clips allow divers to secure the regulators to their chest D-rings, resulting in a more streamlined profile and easy access in case of an emergency.
Commentary
The Toddy Style Sidemount System stands out as a top choice among cold water backmount divers looking to transition smoothly to sidemount diving. It offers a convenient alternative because of its compatibility with both existing regulators and hose lengths, as well as not requiring dedicated cylinders. The presence of a backplate, reminiscent of traditional backmount setups, provides a sense of familiarity and ease of adaptation. Whether for cold water diving or any other diving environment, the Toddy Style Sidemount System offers divers a reliable and comfortable sidemount configuration to enhance their underwater experiences.
xDEEP STEALTH 2.0 Tec
The STEALTH 2.0 TEC was designed for deep decompression diving and extended cave penetrations. It provides 42 kbs/19 kg of lift to support multiple cylinders required for advanced diving. It effectively manages gas movement and position to ensure stability, balance, and trim at any inflation level.
Weight System
- The Xdeep Stealth 2.0 features a customizable central weight system located on the spine. It can be adjusted to accommodate the maximum weight preferred by the diver.
- Additionally, there are droppable weight pockets available in different sizes: S-size (2 x 4.4 lbs/2 kg), M-size (2 x 6.6lbs/3 kg), and L-size (2 x 13.2 lbs/6 kg).
- For fine-tuning trim purposes, there are also trim pockets in M-size (2 x 4.4 lbs/2 kg) or L-size (2 x 6.6lbs/3 kg) that can be placed anywhere on the harness.
Harness
- The harness is one universal size with a wide adjustment range. It consists of independent shoulder, waist/hip, and crotch straps, each made of different thicknesses and fully adjustable with tri-gliders to fit various diver body types.
- The harness utilizes custom hardware, including two fixed large D-rings on the shoulders, two fixed D-rings on the waist/hip strap, and two rubber sliding waist D-rings (metal version available as an upgrade).
- It also has two rear drop square attachments for primary tank attachment, a crotch strap D-ring for accessories below the dump valve, and a DPV D-ring.
- The Y-configured harness attaches to the BCD/wing at the top.
BCD/Wing
- The BCD wing is designed to provide lift at the lower lumbar region. It is constructed with a Cordura 1100 dTEX outer shell fabric and a Nylon 440 dTEX inner bladder with a 0.2 mm TPU coating. It offers 42 lbs/19 kg of lift.
- The upper backside panel is abrasion-resistant for durability.
- The BCD includes an inflator available in three sizes, with a standard length of 16″/41 cm (14″/36 cm and 19″/48 cm available upon request).The inflator can be routed from the left (standard) or right side.
- One central low pull dump also functions as the system’s OPV.
- Bungees keep the wing attached to the waist harness, ensuring a snug fit around the diver’s body.
- The wing’s color combinations can be customized on Xdeep’s website: https://tuneup.xdeep.eu
Commentary
The XDEEP Stealth 2.0 is a well-designed and versatile diving system that caters to the needs of deep decompression diving and extended cave penetrations. Its robust weight system, adjustable harness, and efficient gas management make it a reliable choice for advanced divers. The BCD/wing combination offers ample lift and durability, while the customizable options allow divers to personalize their gear. Note that the modular system can also be configured from recreational sidemount. Overall, the XDEEP Stealth 2.0 combines functionality, comfort, and performance, making it a strong contender for serious diving adventurers.
Please Take a Minute And Complete our New: Sidemount Diving Survey. We will report the results in a coming issue.
Steve Davis is the producer and host of the acclaimed podcast, “Speaking Sidemount,” author of the books, “The Canterbury Wreck – A Diver’s Guide” and the eBook, “Sidemount Fundamentals.” He is a specialist sidemount diver/instructor, dives exclusively in sidemount, and is the principal instructor and founder of Sidemount Pros. Steve travels the world diving sidemount in caves, wrecks, and open water. Through Speaking Sidemount Steve’s mission is to share his passion for sidemount diving and provide a medium for the world’s top sidemount divers, instructors, and explorers to share their experiences and thoughts on sidemount diving.
Stratis Kas, a Greek-Italian professional diving instructor, photographer, film director, and author, has spent over a decade as an esteemed Advanced Cave instructor, leading expeditions to extreme locations worldwide. His impressive diving achievements have solidified his expertise in the field. In 2020, Kas published the influential book “Close Calls,” followed by his highly acclaimed second book, “CAVE DIVING: Everything You Always Wanted to Know,” released in 2023. Accessible on stratiskas.com, this comprehensive guide has become a go-to resource for cave diving enthusiasts. Kas’s directorial ventures include the documentary “Amphitrite” (2017), shortlisted for the “Short to the Point” Film Festival, and “Infinite Liquid” (2019), which explores Greece’s uncharted cave diving destinations and was selected for presentation at Tekdive USA. Kas’s expertise has led to invitations as a speaker at prestigious conferences, including Eurotek UK, Tekdive Europe and USA, Tec Expo, and Euditek. For more information about his work and publications, visit stratiskas.com.
Michael Menduno/M2 is InDepth’s editor-in-chief and an award-winning journalist and technologist who has written about diving and diving technology for more than 30 years. He coined the term “technical diving.” His magazine “aquaCORPS: The Journal for Technical Diving” (1990-1996) helped usher tech diving into mainstream sports diving, and he produced the first tek.Conferences and Rebreather Forums 1.0 & 2.0. In addition to InDepth, Menduno serves as an editor/reporter for DAN Europe’s Alert Diver magazine, a contributing editor for X-Ray mag, and writes for DeeperBlue.com. He is on the board of the Historical Diving Society (USA), and a member of the Rebreather Training Council. Menduno is the organizer of Rebreather Forum 4.
Tren Maya is on the Wrong Track! An Update.
Doping for Depth
Configure Me This: The Annotated Sidemounter
Hydrogen, At Last?
The Who’s Who of Sidemount
Hyperbaric Chambers Are Turning Away Divers. Will There Be One Nearby When You Need It?
The Aftermath Of Love: Don Shirley and Dave Shaw
Let There Be Mix!
