000 01960nam  2200313za 4500
0019.821199
003CaOODSP
00520240219183437
007cr |||||||||||
008160718s2011    onc|||||o    f000 0 eng d
040 |aCaOODSP|beng
041 |aeng|bfre
043 |an-cn---
0861 |aD68-5/116-2011E-PDF
1001 |aMartell, Bill.
24510|aLP/SV bladder buoyancy test comparison |h[electronic resource] / |cby Bill Martell and Ryan Wolter.
260 |a[Ottawa] : |bDefence Research and Development Canada, |cc2011.
300 |aiv, 14 p. : |bfigures.
4901 |aTechnical Note ; |v2011-116
500 |a"July 2011."
504 |aIncludes bibliographical references.
520 |aBackground: The buoyancy of CF jet aircrew LP/SV is unknown and may not provide the minimum 35 lbs that is required. The buoyant force of the British MK 30 LCX is also unknown; however, this flotation device utilizes a large bladder and may replace the LP/SV. Aim: The aim of this experiment was to calculate and compare the buoyant force of the CF LP/SV and the British MK 30 LCX. Methods: Bladders were inflated using either a 35g or a 45g CO2 canister. A Chatillon spring scale was used to measure the buoyant force following submersion. Results: The LP/SV and MK 30 LCX attained buoyant forces of 41 and 42 lbs respectively following inflation using a 35g CO2 canister, and 45 and 53 lbs respectively following inflation using a 45g CO2 canister. Conclusion: In all trials, both flotation devices produced buoyant forces greater that 35 lbs. The British MK 30 LCX produced larger buoyancy forces.
69207|2gccst|aTechnical reports
693 4|aLife preserver
693 4|aSafety vest
7001 |aWolter, Ryan.
7102 |aDefence R&D Canada.
830#0|aTechnical note (Defence R&D Canada)|v2011-116|w(CaOODSP)9.820563
85640|qPDF|s868 KB|uhttps://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2016/rddc-drdc/D68-5-116-2011-eng.pdf