The case against ditchable weight

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

... Nobody yet has answered correctly, that aluminum at ~165 lbs / cu ft is "heavier" than concrete at about 140 lbs / cu ft...

Which is only about 77 Lbs/Ft³ in sea water. That is why a concrete block ends up being such an expensive mooring. It takes a really large vessel and lifting gear to place it. On top of that, the large surface area sinks into sand or mud much more slowly than a denser steel clump at about 432 Lbs/Ft³ in sea water.
 
Which is only about 77 Lbs/Ft³ in sea water. That is why a concrete block ends up being such an expensive mooring. It takes a really large vessel and lifting gear to place it. On top of that, the large surface area sinks into sand or mud much more slowly than a denser steel clump at about 432 Lbs/Ft³ in sea water.

Yup, that's why worn out RailRoad car wheels remain popular.

Tobin
 
Yup, that's why worn out RailRoad car wheels remain popular...

I heard a story that said that is how the mushroom anchor was invented. Not sure if it is true or not. I also heard that surplus (and disarmed) large-bore Naval shells worked well but you have to weld a lot of chain to them unless you know where bedrock is.
 
Big concrete blocks filled with as much scrap 1.5" - 2" rebar as will fit, all held together with an outer steel cage just under the surface of the concrete. Then a big iron ring at the top which extends down into the block and is welded onto one of the big pieces of rebar.
 
I never said neutral at the end of the dive on the surface, I meant positive. It doesn't matter if it's slightly positive or really positive, the point is it's positive meaning that I won't sink unless I work at it.
That also means slightly positive at the surface at the beginning of the dive with a full tank (no air in wing). My theory is that my black or dark colored wetsuit has been out in the sun and the gas bubbles are pumped. That possibly supports the heaviness of the air I'm carrying, however even after a considerable surface swim sometimes where you'd think the suit would begin to cool off and the gas bubbles would get smaller I can still float, so who knows?
Then as I dive the suit obviously compresses and losses buoyancy at depth, this is where the need for a wing and a few huffs of air are needed. Then also at depth the ocean water begins to cool the suit so not only is it compressed but the gas bubbles are cooling and reducing in size also thus reducing buoyancy. So by the time the air is used up (5-6 lbs) I'm on my way up with a much less bouyant suit because suits don't just spring back to full size as you come up, it takes a while, and it's also cooled down. So the combination of the two has offset the loss of air weight somewhat to a trade off. This is how we are able to set our weighting so we can dive with no BC's. There's a lot more to it than just losing 5 lbs of gas.
The fine tuning of weight comes in play with every different suit I own and it's particular characteristics.
There's also the pure physics of the 15 foot stop, which is the most buoyant shift critical area in the water column as far as weight swing. This is why it's a stop BTW. And because of the wild weight swings at the 15' stop, I don't like to have any air in my wing because it sucks to have to constantly feather the trigger on the inflator and dump, so if I have to do that it obviously tells me I have too much weight on that doesn't need to be there. But I figured that one out on my own 15 years ago, with no help from any instructors BTW.

With my wetsuits: The cheap stuff smashes down something terrible, and my Rubatex suits spring right back, plus they are nitrogen filled so it's less prone to crushing. I took me a lot of diving and experimentation to figure all this out and I don't expect other people to take it to quite this degree, but it's what I do.
So you also believe that there is a big difference in compressibility at 15 feet between air and pure nitrogen?
 
So you also believe that there is a big difference in compressibility at 15 feet between air and pure nitrogen?

Nitrogen-blown Rubatex is less compressible than chemically blown Neoprene due to the material's structure, not the gas contained in the cells.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom