The wing picture and stats thread

[*Floater*]

Motivation: Divers, especially new divers, often have no way to properly compare the different wings on the market. They can ask for opinions, but most people here have only used one or two wings and often recommend the one they own. Some pictures are usually available on sellers' web sites, but they are hardly definitive and rarely do you find information about the wings' proper dimensions and even the nominal lift capacity is often inaccurate. Therefore I want people to post pics and measures of their wings. For some super quick and easy photo software I recommend the following;


Helpful utilities:
A. InfranView. It's free, and super fast for viewing and cropping pics - Photoshop takes too long to open on my computer.

B. Image Resizer utility for Windows XP. It add a resize option to your menu when you right click on a file; I always just use the small size for photos I post here.

What to post and measure:

1. Please post a pic of your singles wings next to each other empty, same with doubles wings, and again when full, plus any other pics you have.

2. Please post max width when empty.

3. Max length when empty.

4. Actual lift capacity if you know it. (I believe you can measure this by first weighing the wing empty, then fill it completely with water and weight again. The difference is the lift capacity. I suppose you could also take it under water, attach a fish (hook) scale to it, fill it orally and see how much lift it generates (just make sure you have enough weight to stay down).

5. Any other comments or info you feel is important.

 

[*Floater*]

1. Some pics of my DSS LCD 30 and my GF's Oxycheq Razor 30. The former is double bladder wing and the latter is single bladder.

2 and 3. DSS LCD 30 has max width of about 18.5-19.5" (depending on how much you stetch out the outer bladder) and max length of about 25.5". These are empty measures, but please post yours as well so we have more reference points.

The razor 30 is about 19-20" wide (max when empty) and 25-26" long (empty). The extra inch in those measure is just the seam so it doesn't figure into the wing capacity or gas mechanics.

The LCD wing is of course thicker because it's double layered.

4. I haven't measured the actual capacity, but they look roughly equal in size.

 

[*Floater*]

1. Below are pics of my DSS Torus 45 and Halcyon Evolve 40. First pic is of them empty, the second two are full. Sorry for the bad lighting.

2 and 3. DSS torus max width empty is about 29.75" and length is about 25.5". The evolve is about 26.5" wide and 29" long (empty, max).

4. DSS torus 45 has about 48 according to Tobin or closer to 49# of lift according to 5thD-X site. The Evolves are about 6% over 40 (or 60 for the bigger one) according to Halcyon's True when I asked him about it by PM. But I haven't measured these wings myself.

5. Both are excellent wings, but they differ in shape and size, so one is probably better suited for some people and the other for others depending on personal preference and tanks used.

 

[cool_hardware52]

Floater,

You advice is potentially misleading regarding lift capacity.

To find Actual lift capacity:

1. Weight the wing empty

2. Mount the wing on a plate and secure the tanks intended to be used.

3. Fill the wing with water until the opv vents, being careful to make sure no air is trapped in the wing. This usually requires having the OPV as the High point.

4. Carefully remove the wing from the rig without venting any of the water from the opv unintentionally.

5. Weight the wing full of water.

6. Subtract the empty weight from the full weight.


If you skip step 2 your results will be meaningless, the tanks and the plate can both effect how a wing inflates.


IMO this is exactly why many wings are over rated, i.e. "30" lbs wings that in practice provide much less lift, they were meassured for lift without being mounted.


Tobin

 

[TSandM]

VERY good point, Tobin!

 

[cool_hardware52]

The effects can be dramatic. Our LCD 30 wing when tested in the free or unmounted condition tests at 37 lbs. That's 23% more lift than when assembled.

The effect is greatest on single wings with very narrow center panels, but is present to some extent on most wings.

All inflatables will seek a circular cross section if not constrained by some other barrier.

Just look at any wing filled in the free state, the "Pontoons" are round. This is because a circle has the greatest area for a given lenght of boundry.

When you flatten the circle out, you have the same lenght of boundry, but less area.

Narrow center panel wings, such as our LCD series, introduced in 2004, is designed to use the roughly triangluar void formed on each side of the backplate and tank. This results in a much narrower wing.

Such a design does require that the rated lift be measured assembled to a plate and wing.

My practice is to rate our wings in the most constrained condition. For single tanks that means our shallow angle plate, with the bolt on weights in place, and a long 8" tank, i.e. LP 120 or E-8 130. We mount the weight plates because they will reduce the volume of the triangular void formed by the tank and the plate.

We want to provide accurate real world numbers that represent the "worst case" senario.

Variables that will affect how much a wing is constrained include:

Width of the center panel of the wing. Wide center panels, typical of most single wings may not be constrained by the tank and plate much. Very narrow center panel wings will be greatly affected.

Overall plate angle, steeply bent plates will constrain a wing less.

Depth of the cneter channel, deep center channel plates offset the tank further from the diver, and constrain the wing less.

Single Tank Adapter offset. Offsetting the tank from the plate with a STA will constrain the wing less.

Tank diameter and lenght. A 6.9 inch diameter 72 will contrain a wing less than a 8" 120. A short hp 80 may constrain a wing less than a tank that extends below the bottom of the wing.

Constraining the wing with the tank and the plate is not a problem, as long as it is recognised and the wing is rated appropriately.

Inaccurately rated wings are in my experience quite common. I suspect this is likely a result of contract wing producers who may not even have a plate and a tank to assemble and test, just a "lift spec" to meet, and may have no idea what the assembled condition even looks like.

This is quite understandable when you consider most constract inflatable producers largely make jacket BC's where none of these variables apply.


Regards,


Tobin

 

[SangP]

Wouldn't that make measuring the accurate capacity of wings almost impossible. Cus you'll need to measure that wing with every plate available, GUTS, FredT, OMS, Halcyon, Oxycheq, DSS, Deepoutdoors, Apeks, etc, etc?

SangP

 

[cool_hardware52]

Wouldn't that make measuring the accurate capacity of wings almost impossible. Cus you'll need to measure that wing with every plate available, GUTS, FredT, OMS, Halcyon, Oxycheq, DSS, Deepoutdoors, Apeks, etc, etc?

SangP

Would you then suggest that wings not be rated? Maybe small, medium and large?

I know the ratings I publish are the result of the most conservative test configuration I can produce. To the best of my knowledge nobody makes a flatter plate than DSS. Our "STA-Less" design put the tank closer to the plate than any other with our with out a STA. The bolt on weight plates also intrude into the volume used by the wing, so we test with those mounted also.

Which better serves the diver, having the most conservative lift rating, or some rating that cannot ever be achieved in the real world?

The effective capacity variations between various plates is much smaller than the difference between testing with no plate and no tank and virtually any plate with almost any tank. The plate and Tank and STA combo that would allow a narrow center panel wing to inflate is hard to imagine, and would likely offset the tank many inches from the diver.

I don't have examples of every plate ever made, or even currently produced, but I have few that cover the spectrum in terms of bend angle. I don't have every tank ever produced, but I do have examples from 6.9" dia to 8"

Traditional single wing designs have a wide center panel, often as wide or wider than than most tanks, 8-9" or more. Examples abound. This type of wing will be constrained by the plate and tank very little. Some at the top arc perhaps, a bit along the tank depending on how "clean" and pucker free the fully inflated shape is.

What we recognized in 2004 when designing our first wing, the LCD 30, was there was no reason to have a center panel much wider than required to pass cambands thru. This is possible because, unlike double tank configurations, a single tank contacts the back plate only on the center channel, which is about 1-1.5 inches wide.

By making the center panel ~3 inches wide we intentionally are using the the backplate and tank to control the shape of the inflated wing. This works great, and results in a much narrower overall wing profile, but one does need to recognize the impact on wing capacity.

This thread is an attempt to compile stats on wings. What real use is it to compare the deflated and inflated dimensions of two "30" lbs wings when in actual use one is a true 30 lbs and the other may be more like 25 lbs?


Tobin

 

[*Floater*]

Thanks for your insight on the lift capacity of wings Tobin. It would be great to have them all measured in a standardized way, preferably mounted to a set tank and plate, but any info I can get in this thread is welcome.

Sang, how about posting your pics and measurements from the Mach V thread in this one also, so that people have one thread for comparison? By the way, both the razor 30 and LCD 30 are about 15.5" when full, but measuring them is very subjective and hard to do without someone else holding the wing (which wasn't the case when I measure them), so just take those numbers as rough measures.

Also, I should note that measuring the width can be tricky and subjective. For the single layer wing (Razor 30) it was easy because when empty it folds to max dimensions, but that's not necessarily the case with the double layered wings. The LCD 30 is about 17.5" when empty, and lying on the ground relaxed, but when I flatten it out completely (the way I imagine a small amount of gas inside would pull it apart) I get another 2" out of it. If others have these wings, then please provide your own measurements just so we get more reference points.

 

[SangP]

Tobin,

That's exactly my point. How would I know that your 30 wing will be a 30 on a flat plate like the jet plate or more importantly, will a wing be 30 after it is sandwiched between a plate and a tank.

I certainly understand that you engineer your wings with your plate in mind but for the purposes of this discussion, measuring capacity is limited by what is practical.

At best I can fill the wings with water an then make an estimate of lift capacity with different plates and bends.

Anyway, here are some pics of my wings and their measurements which I posted incorrectly on another thread:

First the Haycon Eclipse 30 and the oxycheq sig 30.

Halcyon Eclipse (Height 26.5", width 18"), O Sig 30 (H 24", W 17.5").

Sig 50 with a sig 30 on top.

Sig 50 (H 25, W 28).

Once I get my other wings back I'll measure and post the pics.

SangP