Snorkel Breathing: Max Length & Factors Explained

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter S. Moger
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the factors influencing the maximum functional length of snorkels, exploring both theoretical and practical aspects. Participants examine concepts related to dead space in breathing, pressure effects at depth, and potential design modifications to mitigate these issues.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that inhaling the same air that is exhaled creates a "dead space" that limits snorkel length.
  • Others argue that the pressure from depth is a significant limiting factor for muscle function during breathing.
  • One participant estimates that the maximum realistic snorkel length due to pressure is about 0.5m when submerged.
  • There is a question regarding whether partial pressures would equalize quickly enough through diffusion, with some expressing uncertainty about the gradient's sufficiency.
  • Some participants propose that if diffusion is adequate, the pressure issue may be less critical, while others emphasize the need for muscle work to facilitate breathing.
  • A participant suggests that using a two-tube system with flapper valves could effectively address the dead space issue.
  • Concerns are raised about the effort required to breathe through small diameter hoses, which may exacerbate the dead space problem.
  • One participant mentions the potential use of Fick's law to estimate diffusion time, noting the need for a diffusion coefficient estimate.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relative importance of dead space versus pressure effects, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without consensus on which factor dominates.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various physiological concepts and calculations, such as tidal volume and dead space measurements, but do not resolve the implications of these factors on snorkel design.

S. Moger
Messages
52
Reaction score
2
Hi,

I have seen multiple explanations as to why there has to be a maximum length for functional snorkels.

1. You inhale the same air that you exhale. (I.e. the so called "dead space" is too large).

2. The extra pressure, provided by the depth, on your chest is too overwhelming for your muscles to perform work against.

I'm sure both are factors, but which would dominate?

I made a quick estimate for 2. which maximizes realistic length at about 0.5m (all below the surface).

About 1. Wouldn't partial pressures equalize quickly enough through diffusion? Or is the gradient too small?

1. and 2. are possibly coupled. Because if diffusion would be enough, number 2 would be somewhat redundant -unless- expansion through muscle work is required to increase diffusion area or decrease diffusion length or alter pressure (if it plays a role). If passive diffusion is not enough, convection would presumably be the main purpose of muscle work?

#1 could possibly be overcome through breathing out through the nose while breathing in through the mouth.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
S. Moger said:
Hi,

I have seen multiple explanations as to why there has to be a maximum length for functional snorkels.

1. You inhale the same air that you exhale. (I.e. the so called "dead space" is too large).

2. The extra pressure, provided by the depth, on your chest is too overwhelming for your muscles to perform work against.

I'm sure both are factors, but which would dominate?

I made a quick estimate for 2. which maximizes realistic length at about 0.5m (all below the surface).

About 1. Wouldn't partial pressures equalize quickly enough through diffusion? Or is the gradient too small?

1. and 2. are possibly coupled. Because if diffusion would be enough, number 2 would be somewhat redundant -unless- expansion through muscle work is required to increase diffusion area or decrease diffusion length or alter pressure (if it plays a role). If passive diffusion is not enough, convection would presumably be the main purpose of muscle work?

#1 could possibly be overcome through breathing out through the nose while breathing in through the mouth.

Speaking as someone who has done the experiment (as a kid) in a pool, #2 is the only factor, IMO. If you use a small diameter hose, the dead space is not that large compared to your lung capacity.
 
berkeman said:
Speaking as someone who has done the experiment (as a kid) in a pool, #2 is the only factor, IMO. If you use a small diameter hose, the dead space is not that large compared to your lung capacity.

But if you use small diameter hose, it takes much more effort to breathe.

Plus, you may be not aware of the fact you are breathing mostly the same air from the dead space.
 
I get the part where the dead space has to be smaller than the "lung capacity" IRV + TV = IC (about 3.5 l) in theory, but then it must be the time to equilibrium that sets the limit. There's both a temperature gradient and a concentration gradient between the exhaled air and the atmosphere. Maybe Ficks law could be used to estimate it, but it requires an estimate of the diffusion coefficient.

In my mind I've always pictured the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution to justify a very quick diffusion process, where there are few collisions, but it doesn't seem to hold here?

X2604-S-43.png


TV is about 0.5 l, while the dead space present in the conducting airways (eg. bronchi, trachea) is about 0.15 l .
 
The dead space problem could be easily overcome using 2 tubes and 2 flapper valves so that one tube only let's air down and the other only let's air up. The pressure problem is a real limiting factor.
 
mrspeedybob said:
The dead space problem could be easily overcome using 2 tubes and 2 flapper valves so that one tube only let's air down and the other only let's air up.

The second tube can be omitted. The air out valve is sufficient. But as it is impossible to blow out water in this configuration there must be an additional mechanism to keep water out of the tube.
 
Borek said:
But if you use small diameter hose, it takes much more effort to breathe.

Plus, you may be not aware of the fact you are breathing mostly the same air from the dead space.

I used a piece of common garden hose as a 10 year-old kid in the backyard pool, which is I guess a medium-diameter hose... :smile:

mrspeedybob said:
The dead space problem could be easily overcome using 2 tubes and 2 flapper valves so that one tube only let's air down and the other only let's air up. The pressure problem is a real limiting factor.

I agree with this approach. Then the main problem is the water pressure, which becomes very apparent as you try to descend more than a meter or so...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
15K