Previous Message: Re: Air Consumption...
Next Message: Re: Air consumption
Month Index: June, 1996
From: Eugene Shumu1insky <static@??.???.????.edu> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 14:43:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: More on Air Consumption...
In our last episode, Thomas O. Magann Jr. said:
>Actually, not's not quite what they say. Page 11 of the Concordanance
>describes the air as thinning with altitude. On Page 7 they comment that the
>thin air eventually becomes unbreatheable, but, at that point a person starts
>breathing air brought along with them in their own envelope.
>
>Which implies that envelopes aren't formed at sea level pressure, but at
>level quite a bit thinner, although still thick enough to breath.
That doesn't make sense to me. I've read that line quite a few
times, and I still don't get it. If the air around me is about to become
unbreathable, then the air I my envelope will pick up is barely breathable.
>I'm ex Navy.
Then maybe you can define SCFH... (:
>trust me, on a cruise, activity levels for the deck crew (which
>is every one but the Officers in a non tech setting) rarely averages the same
>as in more sedate jobs.
Right. I agree with you. I'm just repeating what that paper said.
Maybe that raised level of activity *is* 1 SCFH.
>Actually, a cubic foot of trash takes 8 cubic feet of air along with it. How
>much trash do you think is generated by, say, 30 people? Remeber, this
>includes sewage, water from the galley, a lot scraps and trimming from food
>preperation. Wash water from scrubbing the decks, etc.
Right, sorry. I miscalculated. It's turning into one of those
days... (:
Does anybody have any other hard numbers to work from? I tried
working with Phantom's figure of 1 ft^3 per minute, and got that the amount
of air displaced by 1 ton (2700 ft^3 * 8 = 21,600 ft^3) would be used up
in 15 days. Does that sound more realistic?
I just noticed that my example from the last post was wrong. The
volume of the room should have been 21,600 ft^ (216x10x10), not (27x10x10).
Hmmm... the 15 days *almost* seem about right for something this size. That
is, of course, assuming no loss, and no death due to carbon monoxide
poisoning. Any thoughts?
-Static
--
Static, | --==<< http://k2.CWRU.edu/~static (Stories and Games) >>==--
of the |
NIGHTMARE | "Arioch! Arioch! Blood and souls for my lord Arioch!"
Company |
Previous Message: Re: Air Consumption...
Next Message: Re: Air consumption
Month Index: June, 1996
| Subject | From | Date (UTC) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| More on Air Consumption... | Leroy Van Camp III | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Eugene Shumu1insky | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Thomas O. Magann Jr. | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Eugene Shumu1insky | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Thomas O. Magann Jr. | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Deviant | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Eugene Shumu1insky | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Thomas O. Magann Jr. | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Russ 'Argel' LeBar | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Don Weis | |||
| Re: More on Air Consumption... | Thomas O. Magann Jr. |