| | |||||||
|
Welcome to the YD Scuba forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
| Introductions: Discuss Swedish Bristolian in the General Diving Forums forums: Welcome aboard, I am interested by this tank set-up, seems to make a lot of sense as a alternative to ... |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| ||||
| Imported post If I might stick my oar in, the maths is NOT right. The Real Gas Laws apply and not the Ideal Gas Laws, because the compressibility of gases is not unlimited. At pressures above 232 bar (for air) you get less gas than you would if the Ideal Gas Laws were correct (90% at 300 bar). Anders twin 4 L x 300 bar tanks therefore provide 0.9 x 8 x 300 = 2160 litres of air. Here is a link that explains it all in more detail: http://www.babilim.demon.co.uk/pages.../gas_laws.html By the way, Anders set-up does NOT provide redundancy as there is only one valve, if I remember correctly. Anders uses a pony bottle for redundancy.
__________________ "From birth, man carries the weight of gravity on his shoulders. He is bolted to earth. But man has only to sink beneath the surface and he is free." - Jacques Cousteau |
| ||||
| Imported post I'm glad you 'stuck your oar in', I was hoping for a discussion You are right, I was using the simpler version of the gas laws, but thats because to an accurate representation of the true state you would have to take into account all gas laws appropriately for the system, and I haven't attempted that for years.....and even then the empirical v theoretical results are still distinct. Where does the 90% figure come from ? It seems quite low(oops said high originally, but I think you know what I mean....i.e. quite far from 100%), not disputing it just curious. Thanks for the pointers
__________________ “Did I leave the gas on? No! No, I'm a f***in' squirrel!” Mr E Izzard |
| ||||
| Imported post For the figure of 90% (to be precise, 91.77%), look at the curves in figure 4 in the link I gave.
__________________ "From birth, man carries the weight of gravity on his shoulders. He is bolted to earth. But man has only to sink beneath the surface and he is free." - Jacques Cousteau |
| ||||
| Imported post I ended up seeing if I could calculate it out, cos I never tust those graphs, and ended up at 91.8, not far off. Thanks for that it was a good mental excercise, I have learned something. Sorry, if this was dull for everyone else, I was a chemist and its nice to see the stuff I learned all those years ago actually being applied. Conor
__________________ “Did I leave the gas on? No! No, I'm a f***in' squirrel!” Mr E Izzard |
| ||||
| Imported post Hi Anders. Bristol based, swedish, diving and photography... I just happen to know of a fellow swedish diver, heavily in to photography based in bath.. Mikael uses these forums occasionally and you should be able to find him in the members lists. I dive with Mikael quite often so if you want some contact details give me a shout and I'll dig them out. Happy diving Daz
__________________ Underwater rock juggler extraordinaire Breathe in, breathe out. Repeat as necessary |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
| | ||