warmest wetsuit available

[Thalassamania]

I worried that that would get your hackles up. Trust me it was not my intent. I'm sure you're not used to being corrected on these boards. I'm also sure that you're usually not wrong.

No worrry, no hackles.

The change of state examples I gave are not the only exothermic processes other than chemical reaction. This statement that the claim defies the laws of physics is completely unfounded, further it is incorrect.

Another exothermic non-reactive process is sorption (absorption and adsorption). In physics and chemistry terms what we commonly refer to as absorption is actually adsorption. Adsorption is the process that occurs when a liquid (or gas) accumulates on the surface of a solid. Absorption is when a liquid or gas diffuses into a liquid or solid forming a solution.

Adsorption (and absorption, though that's not relevant to the discussion) is an exothermic process. The notion that wetting wool being exothermic somehow defies the laws of physics is simply not correct. When you apply liquid water to wool (any fabric) it will be exothermic. The wetting of wool happens to be more exothermic than all the other synthetic or natural fabrics reported to have been tested. How appreciable it is is debatable, but the fact that it happens is not.


This statement just isn't true. Making this statement to illustrate that the claim of exothermic process is "horse pucky" just doesn't work. Please explain if you disagree.


I don't see how it's clear at all that they didn't test these materials. Please explain how this is not an assumption on your part. You may very well be right, but it's valuable to highlight which conclusions are based on assumptions and which on information.

I'm not spoiling for a fight, merely interested an accurate and objective discussion of the pros/cons of the wool system. I look forward to further discussion if the goals are shared.

Craig

Craig, If it is not appreciable enough to have a noticeable effect on the warmth of a wetsuit (the topic of discussion, if you recall) then it is horse pucky.

We're dealing with a third-order phenomena, Far less important to the warmth of a diver than the compressibility of seawater is to a diver's SAC rate (average effective diffusion coefficient of water in wool is on the order of 8.4 × 10-14 m2s-1).

You also need to consider that there is question, according to Wartman, Augustin and Popescu[SIZE=-1], as to using [/SIZE]

the well-established D'Arcy/Watt model to describe the isotherms and systematize their temperature dependence.

This is a bit technical and way off topic. If you want to start a topic on the third order effects of wetting wool, please feel free.

 

[Rob9000]

annnywaaaay, back on topic...

one of the suits mentioned is a fullsuit with attached hood (and front horizontal zipper). Just a note that I had a similar suit, but got rid of it as I didn't like the feel of it at all. I had a terribly hard time getting it off by myself. I usually needed someone's help to get it up and over my head. It also felt a bit too constricting. Just something to add to the OPs research.

I found the same issue in trying on the Extreme....the trouble in getting the hood on and off caused me to not buy the suit..I think it is difficult partly because it is a front zip, and partly because that hood needs a sipper of its own to make the neck wider for putting on and off.

Is putting on a dry suit any easier? I would think so.

 

[Paco II]

Exactly how I felt. I now use a 7mm fullsuit, followed by a 7mm Bare Arctic step-in vest with attached hood. It has a diagonal zipper that goes up to your mouth. It looks weird, but is very comfortable. It has the great 'feature' of allowing you to easily don an doff the hood even with all your gear on simply by unzippering it a little.

I found the same issue in trying on the Extreme....the trouble in getting the hood on and off caused me to not buy the suit..I think it is difficult partly because it is a front zip, and partly because that hood needs a sipper of its own to make the neck wider for putting on and off.

 

[Temple of Doom]

You also need to consider that there is question, according to Wartman, Augustin and Popescu[SIZE=-1], as to using [/SIZE]

the well-established D'Arcy/Watt model to describe the isotherms and systematize their temperature dependence.

Wow! You went from claiming it contradicted the laws of physics to making such a seemingly conversant statement. Then I googled and found the abstract I imagined you were paraphrasing:

Temperature dependence of the water-sorption isotherms of wool
F.-J. Wortmann 1 *, P. Augustin 1, C. Popescu 2
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/76502778/ABSTRACT
"Against the background of various other theories, the well-established D'Arcy/Watt model is applied to sorption data of wool between 20 and 100°C to determine its suitability to describe the isotherms and to systematize their temperature dependence."

That sure looks like a copy-paste-edit job. Then I noticed that you accidentally copy-pasted an invisible security tag from that page to highlight just such a thing. Take a look in your above post, you've got an invisible image in there: "http://download.interscience.wiley.com/images/dot.clear.gif"

Also, I just read that exact page, and they only question that D'Arcy/Watt overcomplicates the explanation, they don't question the empirical evidence. By all means paraphrase sources, but at least be able to apply it to the discussion, and have it relevant to the discussion. I get the impression of a GPO spewing out an ink-screen, then jetting away.

I call horse pucky. That gear you're looking for is to the right and down.

Craig

Edit: Hmm, perhaps that paraphrase about D'Arcy/Watt was a joke. If so it was good one (no I'm not being sarcastic).
Edit2: Ah, it wasn't.

 

[Thalassamania]

What's wrong with a cut and paste that is credited to the authors?

 

[Mako Mark]

Then I noticed that you accidentally copy-pasted an invisible security tag from that page to highlight just such a thing.

I think your karma just ran over his dogma...

 

[Stu S.]

Hey Divers,

Wetsuit neoprene was once stated in fractions of an inch. Thicknesses available were 1/8, 3/16, 1/4, and 3/8 inch. I saw the 3/8 suit but never wore one. That would be like a 9.5 millimeter suit by today's measurement.

Is anything this thick still available?

 

[Mako Mark]

I once saw 10 mm semidry suits in NZ, they were designed for an antarctic expedition. I reckon they could pretty much stand up by themselves. Havent seen anything that thick for years tho.

 

[Thalassamania]

1/2 inch thick Rubatex 231 is still available. I'm told that you can have that "split" on special order.

Rubatex

 

[dumpsterDiver]

you can get 9 mm suits (but not in wool)