In Tank Regulator Concept

Sorry it took so long. After I finished the pic I forgot all about needing to get Frontpage on this machine as well. Anyway…….

Nothing crazy here but I think there are a few decent ideas. This regulator would be inside the tank but still be adjustable without having to remove it.

The regulator would use two tubes instead of one. This would allow the spring chamber to be vented to the outside air and also allow you to change the PSI setting by screwing in the inner tube without having to remove the regulator. You would also be able to unscrew the inner tube and remove it along with the regulator piston and springs without losing pressure in the outer tank. The high pressure valve and outer tube would remain in the tank.

A: This is where the inner tube and its end cap slide inside the outer tube. There would need to be a gap between the tubes or the inner tube would need to be scored to allow air to pass between them. Im concerned that the two opposing pressure chambers will force the tube walls together and lock it in place. To overcome this the two mating surfaces could be polished or a small gap between them might be necessary.

B: This is the vent to the outside air.

C: These are the mating surfaces connecting the machined parts and the tubes. Normally these would be threaded but I was wondering if sweating or soldering the joints would be an alternative. I know they do this in high pressure AC lines. You would not need to remove them once joined so I think this would make the machining process allot easier and would cut out all the Orings needed if it were threaded.

D: I was thinking about threading the end of the piston so that you could screw a long rod into it for removal. Otherwise the piston would be hard to get out of the regulator for service.

Sorry Mike, this wasnt done to scale, again, but looking at your regulator I dont see why they wouldnt fit in the available space. I would love your feedback or thoughts on this one.

A couple negatives to this design.

It couldnt be modified to work with existing valves. I think I would rather have this mated to a low back-pressure valve anyway so that I could run a smaller spring and hammer on the other end.

Using two tubes will reduce the regulated chamber volume. I dont think it will be much though especially if the two tubes can share the pressure load and not lock up due to the two opposing pressure chambers.

Im beat, thats all I can think of atm. Im sure I mussed something up but I know you guys will point it out for me ) Thanks in advance.