A question for any scientists out there

[Sea Rider]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Long time wanting to know with apropriate tools how much pressure a sib loses or gains once on water : Inflated a 380 sib to 3.0 psi on all chambers at 10 AM on a foggy day.

Exterior temperature 22? C - 71.6? F
Water temperature 15? C - 59? F
Sib Pressure 3.00 PSI

30 Minutes Later on water :

External temperature 22? C - 71.6? F
Water temperature 15? C - 59? F
Sib pressure 2.80 PSI
Tube temperature 23? C - 73.4? F

Checked conditions at 2.0 PM, the day was clear and slight sunny

External temperature 25? C - 77? F
Water temperature 16? C - 60.8? F
Sib pressure 3.0 PSI
Tube temperature 26? C - 78.8? F

Some conclusions in my particular case & location :

-With such small amount of pressure lose, you could not tell by finger/feel test the pressure difference at all.
-The colder the day and water, will lose more pressure.
-The warmer the day with near same water temp, gains more pressure.
-In plain summmer with about same water temp and 28? outside temp, usually inflate sibs to just 2.5 PSI, let sun do the overinflation to 3.0 PSI
-In plain winter with water temps of 12?-14? and no sun inflate sib to 3.25/3.5 to have near 3.00 PSI after deflation.
-Any sib/rib inflated to 3.5 PSI will be too bumpy if light loaded, recommended if fully loaded to have boat rigidity and top performance.
-The pressure that gives rigidity to any inflatable will vary accordinglly in coastal uses to : PSI inflated to, external temp & water temp.

TG states pressure loses of 0.5 to 1.0 PSI, that sib must have a fabric leak product of fishing , he doesn't use a gauge, has a feel gauge finger product of experimenting pressures to touch or bending rear cones, this method won't give same pressure on all tubes as using a real gauge for overall all chambers rigidity. It's like inflating your car tires at touch.

Happy Boating

 

[TOHATSU GURU]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Actually I said .1 to .5 and I can tell the difference by a finger test. I also stated that we do use a gauge in the shop. I really wish people with little or no experience would stop trying to equate their knowledge with mine....And yes, I do mean you.

 

[1980Coronado]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

-The colder the day and water, will lose more pressure.

Incorrect conclusion. It's the delta, or difference in temperature that causes the pressure change. The closer the ambient temperature is to the water temperature the less change in pressure there will be...assuming the inflatable is at the same temperature as ambient.

 

[Sea Rider]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Actually I said .1 to .5 and I can tell the difference by a finger test. I also stated that we do use a gauge in the shop. I really wish people with little or no experience would stop trying to equate their knowledge with mine....And yes, I do mean you.

Some issues:

1-Oooops for not seeing the expressed numbers without the 0, 0.1 to 0.5 is correct, you've earned 500 bonus points.
2-Happy you, that comes factory delivered with finger gauge included, congrats. One in a million with that finger precision.
3-Gauges should be used outside for correct inflation, that's what they are for.
4-Nobody is trying to adequate knowledges, we have different tech paremeters and will continue having them.
5-Don't know who you are reffering when saying little or no experience, probably an outsider to this nice forum.
6-The colder the day was badly expressed, should be ambient temperature as correctly stated upwards
7-Really don't care if it's the Delta, Archimedes or Boyers, principles or laws, always have used a gauge and will keep using them while boating with inflatables.

Happy Boating

 

[TOHATSU GURU]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Your problem is that you really don't have much experience in anything...But, you have an overpowering desire to post. I don't think you are bad guy, even though you have a real inferiority complex as far as I am concerned. I just wish you would:

1: Learn to read.
2: Understand that others have a lot more ability then you do.
3: Understand that others have a lot more ability then you do.
4: Understand that your experience is practically non existent compared to others.
5: You, you, a thousand times, you.
6: Don't care.
7: If you stick with this for another 20 years maybe you too will not need a gauge.

I know I hurt your feelings awhile back when I said that you asked pointless question. For that I am truly sorry. I was correct then...I just shouldn't have pointed it out.

 

[jacoboregon]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

I challenge ANYONE on this forum that I can move a load in a wheelbarrow 25 yds that they cannot. How's that for an inferiority complex!!!

 

[Sea Rider]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Your problem is that you really don't have much experience in anything...But, you have an overpowering desire to post. I don't think you are bad guy, even though you have a real inferiority complex as far as I am concerned. I just wish you would: BLA, BLA, BLA

Everybody knows we don't get along very well, have our differences and will continue having them, tell me, a guy with more than 5 K posts on this forum doesn't fall in the same overpowering desire to post with extreme connotation & figuration as having the last word ? Answering your kind post about my person :

You are some times a cool guy, but most of the time you?re not, definitely age, mental issues, frustration and bad manners with posters. Relax, have a Xanax, breath, count 1 to 15. Your answer is completely childish, my 14 year old daughter can write much better, before posting think, don?t write with your oversized liver, will end breaking the keypad, post properly as a grown up.

Haven't thought even for a second about being a smart *** full knowledge guy at the forums, my general posting are backed by trial & error, not from plain booklet theory. Posters will judge if the provided information helped or not and are free to take it or not. There will always be one that knows more than me and that will include you too, so, it?s time you start getting off from your undeserved Guru pedestal.

One thing is joking betwen parts with respect and moderation, other is losing totally the compass and direction. Let me tell you, yes you, that have lost the right composture & netiquette long time ago. For ending this sour discussion at least on my part and pleasing me the most, is that have -0 to learn from you. For you to wallow in your office rocking chair, a place you haven?t been out many years ago to go sibbing/ribbing and enjoying, read this bottomline closely and who's comming from. Check with them if still incredulous.

Congratulations! We have noticed you and your great contributions on the iboats forums. We selected you as one of the 500 most influential iboats forum members out of 194,000 members! Thank you so much for your participation and time spent on iboats. Why is iboats contacting you? Because of your high level status on the iboats' message boards, we are inviting you and our other top 500 members to be part of the pre-launch of our newest and upcoming community areas.. Thanks again for being a part of iboats and please feel free to email me with questions or suggestions.

Tanner-Williams
iboats-Social-Media-Mgr.
twilliams@iboats

Happy Boating

 

[TOHATSU GURU]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

I'm done with you.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin']

Re: A question for any scientists out there

I'm sorry to see that this thread, at least for some participants, has turned into a forum to exchange personal attacks. In the spirit of the upcoming Holidays, let's try to minimize that. I am amazed, though, with the number replies and great ideas and issues raised.

I mentioned earlier that the answer to my question won't solve any of the world's problems, but I've learned a lot here. At the risk of overdoing it, please allow me to ask a simplified question:

Assume all factors (water temperature, air temperature, quality of patch repairs, etc.) remain the same during this experiment. I inflate my Zodiac (with air floor), attach the engine and put it in the water. I measure the air pressure in the floor and tubes while standing on the dock. Then, four passengers (in total, weighing an amount equal to the maximum capacity of the Zodiac) immediately board the boat from the dock.

After the four passengers board, I immediately measure the air pressure in the floor and in the tubes. Will the pressure readings in the floor and tubes be greater or lesser with the four passengers in the boat than without?

I hope everyone has a nice Thanksgiving and thanks again for your participation!

 

[jacoboregon]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

I'm sorry to see that this thread, at least for some participants, has turned into a forum to exchange personal attacks. In the spirit of the upcoming Holidays, let's try to minimize that. I am amazed, though, with the number replies and great ideas and issues raised.

I mentioned earlier that the answer to my question won't solve any of the world's problems, but I've learned a lot here. At the risk of overdoing it, please allow me to ask a simplified question:

Assume all factors (water temperature, air temperature, quality of patch repairs, etc.) remain the same during this experiment. I inflate my Zodiac (with air floor), attach the engine and put it in the water. I measure the air pressure in the floor and tubes while standing on the dock. Then, four passengers (in total, weighing an amount equal to the maximum capacity of the Zodiac) immediately board the boat from the dock.

After the four passengers board, I immediately measure the air pressure in the floor and in the tubes. Will the pressure readings in the floor and tubes be greater or lesser with the four passengers in the boat than without?

I hope everyone has a nice Thanksgiving and thanks again for your participation!

The real question should be "Why do you care?" are you overloading your boat? Are you inflating it properly?

If you are using within its specifications, then absolutely NONE of those questions are the least bit relevant. If you are really so worried about such insignificant things, then you should stay out of boats and off the water.

I'm starting to think you are only trying to create strife. Not Cool.

 

[NetDoc]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Will the pressure readings in the floor and tubes be greater or lesser with the four passengers in the boat than without?

By logic, they would have to be greater. In reality, you probably could not measure that small of an increase.

 

[NetDoc]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

The real question should be "Why do you care?"

As he stated in the OP, he wanted to understand the science of it. Not everyone shares that desire, and that's OK too.

If you are really so worried about such insignificant things, then you should stay out of boats and off the water.

I'm starting to think you are only trying to create strife. Not Cool.

Oh the irony! In one sentence you create strife and in the next you condemn the very same thing. Its a big forum. Answer the question or leave it alone. No need to vilify anyone for their particular take on an answer or their desire to understand physics.

 

[jacoboregon]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

As he stated in the OP, he wanted to understand the science of it. Not everyone shares that desire, and that's OK too.

Oh the irony! In one sentence you create strife and in the next you condemn the very same thing. Its a big forum. Answer the question or leave it alone. No need to vilify anyone for their particular take on an answer or their desire to understand physics.

It is certainly ok if someone wants to try to understand the science of it. That doesn't make it any less silly to obsess about, because the truth still stands that it is pointless and completely insignificant, unless of course you want to try to design an inflatable with better materials. But the op stated he wanted to know if his patch would hold. None of those issues are significant in that question. The only significant science is the chemistry of the patching process.

There actually is no irony at all. While I don't condone strife, I'm not one to run when it presents itself, and not afraid to call "bull****".

Now what would make a very interesting debate is why science has so many theories, which can neither be proved or disproved, but are merely guesses by people with more hubris than common sense, and a poll on whether or not the most educated people you know are in turn the people with the least common sense.

 

[NetDoc]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Now what would make a very interesting debate is why science has so many theories, which can neither be proved or disproved, but are merely guesses by people with more hubris than common sense, and a poll on whether or not the most educated people you know are in turn the people with the least common sense.

Wait, you think Einstein's theory of relativity is merely a guess? How absurd. Are you suggesting that the theory of evolution can't be proven? How quaint! I'm completely underwhelmed by the intellect here. Next you'll be telling us that quantum mechanics was just a hunch that has no merit either. Most people who claim that a theory can't be proven simply lack the ability to actually understand it. Why? Usually, they are simply full of their own arrogant understanding and refuse to seek a more complete one. The hubris is in somehow feeling superior for not being able to understand the science behind it all. Even more laughable is their inability to distinguish between evidence and proof. Can you? If you want to call BS, simply read your last two posts and stop there. The science has been proven far beyond your frail attempts to discredit it.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin']

Re: A question for any scientists out there

You think I'm here to create strife, jacoboregon? All I did was present a scientific question. Quite honestly, I think you have nothing better to do than to troll these forums and create strife. Why don't you do us both a favor and enjoy some good Thanksgiving company (good luck on that one!) and some good football and forget that this thread and I exist?

@NetDoc...thanks and thanks

 

[jacoboregon]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

A theory is a "theory" because it cannot be proven. Even someone with an education should understand that.

But actually net, I do apologize for any personal slight against you. I should have stuck to my problem with this op, not let the ridiculousness of the thread get to me, and simply stated the falsehood of the supposed premise of the "question" and stated if he really wanted an answer to whether or not his patch would hold he was asking completely wrong questions. Maybe because he is inexperienced and ignorant of inflatable boats. If his real question had nothing to do with the patch but what possible forces act on the integrity of the boat while it is in the water and being used and how wonderful the engineers are that designed them, he shouldn't have confused it with "will the patch hold". His ignorance is his ignorance. It's no skin off my back.

I have nothing against what you said about any scientific principles you stated which act on the boat, they just are insignificant on whether or not a patch will hold, which is what he said in the op was his reason for asking the question.

So once again netdoc, I do apologize to you.

 

[jacoboregon]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

You think I'm here to create strife, jacoboregon? All I did was present a scientific question. Quite honestly, I think you have nothing better to do than to troll these forums and create strife. Why don't you do us both a favor and enjoy some good Thanksgiving company (good luck on that one!) and some good football and forget that this thread and I exist?

@NetDoc...thanks and thanks

Who are you???

 

[CaliforniaDreamin']

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Who am I, jacoboregon? I'm someone who thinks you are both ignorant and uneducated. You could start your education by looking up the definition of the term "scientific theory". The Wikipedia entry might help you understand why I posed my questions here. Although I can't speak for others, I'm sure I'm not the only one who gained knowledge and understanding from the replies posted here.

You really need to get a life beyond trolling these forums and creating strife. See my posting at #75 for some suggestions.

From my limited experience with you, I have concluded that you have nothing worthwhile to offer to these forums. You are here only to beg for the attention that you don't get in real life. I will, therefore, be ignoring your subsequent posts and urge my fellow readers to do the same.

 

[YZ165]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

Well this one went to hell in a hand basket....

 

[NetDoc]

Re: A question for any scientists out there

A theory is a "theory" because it cannot be proven. Even someone with an education should understand that.

O Rly??? Let's test your theory, er definition from dictionary.com:

the?o?ry

 [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee]
noun, plural the?o?ries.

1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.

2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. Antonyms: practice, verification, corroboration, substantiation.

3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.

4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.

5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles: conflicting theories of how children best learn to read.

As someone with an education and an above average grasp of the English language, I would like to point out that your concept of "theory" is flawed. You're stuck on definition #2 while the predominant way it is used is definition #1. In formal debate I would point out that this is just a strawman used in your ad hominem attack on my credentials. I find it ironic and a bit amusing that you question my education in the first statement and then apologize for that in the last. :facepalm: Back to the definition of theory... look at the synonyms for definition #1: principle, law and doctrine. The pseudo intellectual will often try to hide behind definitions, twisting them in a way that no one uses or ignoring other common definitions in order to defend the indefensible. While they think they are being clever most of us simply roll our eyes and groan. To whit, there are many "proofs" that evolution exists. One need only to examine the fossil record to establish that and to see these gradual changes beyond any question. Those with an extreme agenda though will rant and rave about it being only a "theory". Shenanigans. Theory is used as "principle" here: the principle of evolution. If you're still stuck on this, try to understand the relationship and differences between prove, proof and evidence. Chances are if you are under the misguided understanding that "theory" only means unproven, you don't have a clue about these.

Unlike dogma, science seeks to fully understand these processes. In that respect, science while being ultimately pedantic, is a bit on the fluid side. This means that as our understanding of our universe changes, so does science. At one time the scientists thought the world was flat. That theory was disproven and a new theory replaced it. Since then, that theory has been modified so we know that the earth is not a perfect circle and that rather than the universe revolving around the earth, we have far more complex theories that explain (with proof) how the earth relates to the universe. Perfect science is devoid of ego or sentimentality. Unfortunately, scientists are full of both so we often have people opposing new discoveries using fear, ignorance and intimidation.

I almost forgot: apology accepted. Thanks for that.​