It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Breathe Under Water Without Oxygen Tanks

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   


An Israeli Inventor has developed a breathing apparatus that will allow breathing underwater without the assistance of oxygen tanks. This new invention will use the relatively small amounts of air that already exist in water to supply oxygen to both scuba divers and submarines. The invention has already captured the interest of most major diving manufacturers as well as the Israeli Navy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The idea of breathing underwater without cumbersome oxygen tanks has been the dream of science fiction writers for many years. In George Lucas’ movie "The Phantom Menace", Obi-Wan whips out a little Jedi underwater breathing apparatus and dives in. As things tend to happen in our world, yesterday’s science fiction has turned into today's science fact due to one Israeli inventor with a dream.

There are a number of limitations to the existing oxygen tank underwater breathing method. The first is the amount of time a diver can stay underwater, which is the result of the oxygen tank capacity. Another limitation is the dependence on oxygen refueling facilities near the diving site which are costly to operate and are used to compress the gas into the tanks which might be dangerous if not handled properly. The final problem has to do with the actual use of oxygen tanks underwater. When these tanks are in use they empty out and change the balance of the diver in the water.

Engineers have tried to overcome these limitations for many years now. Nuclear submarines and the international space station use systems that generate Oxygen from water by performing 'Electrolysis', which is chemical separation of Oxygen from Hydrogen. These systems require very large amounts of energy to operate. For this reason, smaller, diesel fueled submarines cannot use these systems and are required to resurface to re-supply their oxygen tanks every so often. Divers can't even consider carrying such large machines not to mention supplying them with energy. To overcome this limitation an Israeli inventor, Alon Bodner, turned to fish.
Fish do not perform chemical separation of oxygen from water; instead they use the dissolved air that exists in the water in order to breathe. In the ocean the wind, waves and underwater currents help spread small amounts of air inside the water. Studies have shown that in a depth of 200m below the sea there is still about 1.5% of dissolved air. This might not sound like much but it is enough to allow both small and large fish to breathe comfortably underwater. Bodner’s idea was to create an artificial.............. more here: www.isracast.com...





Pretty interesting stuff.




posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Okay, just a nitpick from a scuba diver: they're not "oxygen tanks"; they're air tanks (or once in a while nitrox or heliox tanks).

However, this is a tremendous invention, when and if. But as much as I want to have one of these doobies, we need to think of the advantages and disadvantages vis-a-vis compressed air tanks.

Endurance: Assuming you get an hour's worth of air out of a battery-charge at 30 feet, the new system wins out. A typical 80-lb tank presurized to 3000 psi will give me about 40 minutes at 30 feet. My guess is that the batteries are smaller than tanks, so you could carry enough battery power to provide 4 to 5 hours of air, which would be extremely difficult with the tanks, given that you'd need 7 or 8 of them!

Cost: The present system is way cheaper. Remember the big cost driver isn't the tank: it's the regulator, octopus, BC, and computer (in addition to the suit, fins, mask, and snorkel), and you'd have to have all of them, regardless of how you get your air. A good new steel tank is about a hundred bucks.

Simplicity/safety: Lots of electricity to run the depressurizer and fast-spinning parts -- all underwater. That bothers me.

Nonetheless, the system shows tremendous potential. I'm going to keep following it.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Good invention, I see a lot of potential especially if they get those new batteries that last for like 8 years on one of those


Why can't things be made to replicate Fish's gills? They still need oxygen, with that...just pop it in your mouth and go



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
...but along with such an awesome invention comes the use for bad. Remember the scare about terrorists entering the U.S. using scuba gear? This makes that possibility far easier for them. Oh well I still want one.



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ken_Allen
Good invention, I see a lot of potential especially if they get those new batteries that last for like 8 years on one of those


Why can't things be made to replicate Fish's gills? They still need oxygen, with that...just pop it in your mouth and go


Just taking a wild guess so don't jump on me. Maybe fish need less oxygen than land based animals. Like when you take a fish from the water, even though they do need oxygen from water too much of a good thing will kill it. Like I said thats my guess.




top topics
 
0

log in

join