Jerry
As discussed above, I'd be happy with the effort of using a pump. It would give independence - a bit like having a springer. I was wondering about the practicality of the pumps which don't have driers. The necessity of driers, faff factor and effectiveness.
BTW, Utah in summer was a wonderful place for breathing!
P1V1overT1=P2V2overT2
About 2 mins or less to fill an s200.
Approx 1 pump per shot.
About as much physical exertion as running upstairs twice .
I should have said some moisture.
The moisture content in diving air is regulated to ensure that the demand regulator valve doesn't freeze up as the air expands through it. As such, those dive compressors do dry the air, but leave a small amount of water in the air. Stirrup pumps don't dry the air at all, and the moisture content can be fairly high. As such, a high pressure dessicant filter is recommended so that the moisture can condensate and collect in the filter before the dried air goes into the gun's cylinder.
This old thread talks about some of the issues and fixes for using pumps.
.
Jerry
I think you're confusing your filters... Glass isn't a dessicant material and as I understand it works by passing the air over a large surface area for any residual moisture to condense on.
Its tiny and has no drain and doesn't appear to do much in practice, having stripped it after use before, but I left in on anyway.
That's in contrast to the pumps internal moisture trap - now that does eject visible moisture when you open the bleed screw prior to disconnection.
I think only Hills use a dessicant filter on the intake side - but I believe the incoming air's residence time in the dessicant material is too short to have anything beyond a token effect and is more of a selling point than an effective means of removing moisture in this application.
I believe the pumps basic design and internal moisture trap is the real key to the ability to remove the moisture and the FX pumps seem to do it quite well.
Last edited by harvey_s; 06-10-2020 at 09:38 AM.