why is the rear dump facing the diver
- Thread starter lanun
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
You'd have a problem getting to it if it wasn't.
MD
MD
Bob3
Contributor
On the Northern Diver wings, there is both a normal dump and a "yank the hose" flavor that I like to refer to as a "panic dump".
Both are on the outside, relative to the diver.
You sure you have the wing installed properly??
Both are on the outside, relative to the diver.
You sure you have the wing installed properly??
When the wing has air, the wing wraps around the tank and the "front" or diver side of the wing becomes the outside.
If the valve was on the "back" of the wing, when inflated, the valve would be against the tank.
If the valve was on the "back" of the wing, when inflated, the valve would be against the tank.
Bob3
Contributor
I wonder which design has the tendency to trap more air? (if it even makes a difference)
...consider that the designers are cavers and may have bumped into an overhead or two in their lifetimes. A "tank-side" dump valve might snag, deflate the wing, and drop you in the silt. The "diver-side" dump, in addition to being easier to reach, is much less likely to become entangled--your body will most likely hit the entanglement hazard before the dump valve.
1) i'd like to like to understand why the rear dump valve on the wing is designed to face the body instead of away from the body
his reply :
With the optimal trim position for a diver being horizontal, the most often used means to remove gas from the wing is the rear dump valve. Placing this dump valve within reach of the diver is key. Due to the physical size of a dual cylinder wing, a diver could not easily reach to the dorsal side of the wing in order to maintain buoyancy control. If the dump were on the dorsal side of the wing, some sort of convoluted drawstring or other such complicated arrangement would be required.
In short, the consequences of not being able to reach the rear dump (highest flow rate) ie. control buoyancy, are potentially disastrous. Needlessly complex dump mechanisms are failure points, and should be avoided. The design of the bladders are such that the very minimal advantages of a dorsal placement are easily outweighed by the disadvantages.
2) i remember seeing pics of some wing inflators with a 135 degree offset Vs 90 degree. why the change ?
His reply :
The current inflator design was deemed more desirable due to better hose routing characteristics, size, and button positioning.
his reply :
With the optimal trim position for a diver being horizontal, the most often used means to remove gas from the wing is the rear dump valve. Placing this dump valve within reach of the diver is key. Due to the physical size of a dual cylinder wing, a diver could not easily reach to the dorsal side of the wing in order to maintain buoyancy control. If the dump were on the dorsal side of the wing, some sort of convoluted drawstring or other such complicated arrangement would be required.
In short, the consequences of not being able to reach the rear dump (highest flow rate) ie. control buoyancy, are potentially disastrous. Needlessly complex dump mechanisms are failure points, and should be avoided. The design of the bladders are such that the very minimal advantages of a dorsal placement are easily outweighed by the disadvantages.
2) i remember seeing pics of some wing inflators with a 135 degree offset Vs 90 degree. why the change ?
His reply :
The current inflator design was deemed more desirable due to better hose routing characteristics, size, and button positioning.
Similar threads
