New rescue technology is emboldening surfers to take bigger risks

The Billabong V1, or Vertical Ascent 1, allows a rider driven deep underwater to pull a shoulder-mounted rip cord, causing a CO2 cartridge to inflate an air bladder capable of rocketing the wearer back to the surface.

 

In an attempt to further understand the sensation of being ‘held under’ I filmed some big-wave training techniques used by athletes like Louis with my flatmates, at Northumbria Sport’s swimming pool.

The techniques involves extended periods of being spun
underwater whilst holding your breath and running with weights,
with periods of intensive swimming inbetween.

Unfortunately, there wasn’t much useful information gained from this
experiment. With a clearer study motive, or more focused study topic,
I could have gained some more valuable insights.

Welcome to the first chapter of my Critical Justification Blog. This platform will serve to document my design research, processes, observations and proposals during my final year at Northumbria University.

Groundbreaking invention in terms of overall form-factor, or technical capabilities of a product has always beeen my greatest area of interest in Industrial Design. Applications of new or existing technologies in consumer products is something that I have strongly wanted to pursue in my own work. This nature of drastic re-evaluation of a product area was a key focus when defining my development direction.

I have had a long-lasting personal interest in watersports, but the desire to approach watersports safety as a Final Major Project direction stems from an event that nearly drowned me 4 years ago. This event involved prolonged submersion by a breaking wave, being unable to reach the surface and breathe.

In response to this, I formulated the following question to help refine my development direction:

“How can we apply existing technologies

to modernise safety in watersports?”

By ‘Exisitng Technologies’, I set out to investigate personal safety devices of all areas guiding a much wider exploration of materials, processes and products of further industries.

‘Modernising Safety’ Will involve producing an entirely ‘novel’ safety device, in terms of technical abilities, form, operation or specific use. This could involve a re-evaluation on an exisitng safety device, or an entirely novel approach to that design area.

‘Watersports’ specifcally involves a wide range of watersports with a focus on dynamic mobility. Following from my initial research on Lifejacket and Portable Flotation Device qualifications and specifications, I have decided to approach this brief with a focus on the ISO 50N / USCG Type V. This area provides opportunity to develop the most compact, versatile solution suitable for a wide range of watersports applications.

Multiple target areas include, but are not limited to: Coasteering, Kitesurfing, SUPing, Surfing.

How I intend to answer this question:

To answer this question, I am focusing on understanding the technologies and industries applied in a concept’s development. A greater understanding of each component’s industry will both provide me with the insight to succinctly apply them in a product solution, and aid in developing a wider range of skills as an industrial designer.

One example industry is SCUBA: small contained underwater breathing apparatus’ will, as initial research suggests, potentially be involved in the solution and so should be fully understood before development begins. Another example is the designing and prototyping of inflatables, which is something that I have never had any experience in doing. Finally this project involves not just the technologies applied, but the target market, and all of the factors here that influence development directions. It is here that contacts such as Kevin Anderson will prove invaluable.

Skills and Knowledge Required:

SCUBA: Understanding air delivery underwater could prove essential in the product solution. Being such a hazardous area, a full understanding of all of the safety implications of air delivery underwater is required before any development begins.

Coasteering: My contact Kevin Anderson, through several meetings, will help provide insight into the industry of coasteering as I develop the solution. His insights as a lifeguard, kitesurfing trainer and coasteering guide will being to light several necessities across the lifecycle: from storage and maintenance, to safety and operation when in use.

CO2 Inflatables: These inflatables are a key area of inspiration in this project. They appear to meet the requirements of compact size and versatility, and will act as a vital foundation of knowledge to further develop from.

Syntax: The order-of-use for lifesupports must be absolutely intuitive, requiring minimum stages of operation in difficult and stressful situations. This is a key area of the development process that must be constantly addressed in every revision.

 

.

In the video above, the demonstrated activation of the CO2 release on the type V shows that the standard manouvre involves the right arm. Alternate options do not seem to be available for left-handed users. This could prove an interesting design area. I will consult with Kevin Anderson on his thoughts: would having left and right-handed options increase or decrease product reliability?

To begin narrowing down on the concept direction, I have selected the following Lifejacket / Portable Flotation Device (PFD) certifications as targets. This is due to the following:

• The brief highlights that the solution must encourage dynamic watersports. In the interest of appealing to a wide-range of watersports enthusiasts.
• In ensuring the minimum level of interference, a compact form factor is essential. This design project focuses on providing an alternative, more compact Lifejacket solution specifically for use in dynamic watersports such as coasterring and kitseurfing. These qualifications provide affordance of more compact product volumes in development.
• Given that the solution provides compressed air for situations where they may be trapped underwater, too much buoyancy could immobilise the user, creating a more hazardous scenario.

ISO & CE Types

Both types are the same in terms of their buoyancy and generally in features too

50N – Buoyancy Aid:

Designed for competent swimmers in sheltered water where help is close at hand. They only provide support to conscious people who can help themselves, and are an aid to flotation only.  They have 50 Newtons (11 lbs.) of flotation.

US Standards – USCG Approved

Type I: Offshore Life Jackets:

Best for all waters; open ocean, rough seas, or remote water, where rescue may be slow coming.  Though foam types are bulky, inflatables ones are not.  They have the most buoyancy, reflective tape, a bright color and can turn most unconscious people face up in the water.  Type I foam life jackets can be uncomfortable to wear while sailing.  Foam type I jackets provide 33 pounds (100 Newtons) of flotation, while type I inflatable life jackets provide 33 pounds (150 Newtons) of flotation.  There are currently no USCG approved type I inflatable life jackets.

Type II: Near-shore Vests:

Calm inland waters, where a quick rescue is likely, is the intent of these PFDs. They will turn some unconscious wearers to the face-up position but not all of them. Foam Type II’s are ‘bulky’ and not generally comfortable to wear while sailing, but less ‘bulky’ than foam Type I’s.  Foam type II jackets provide 15.5 pounds (70 Newtons) of flotation, while type II inflatable life jackets provide have 33 pounds (150 Newtons) of flotation.  Type II foam life jacket are usually the inexpensive type stowed on board to insure USCG compliance.  Inflatable Type IIs offer higher flotation and comfort and are popular for wearing at all times.

Type III: Flotation Aids:

These are suitable for most sailors where there is a chance for a quick rescue. They offer freedom of movement and the most comfort for a conscious person. Foam type III’s are designed so wearers can put themselves in a face-up position, but they may have to tilt their head back to avoid being face down in water.  Inflatable type III’s generally float a person head back.  Foam type III life vests provide 15.5 pounds (70 Newtons) of flotation, while inflatable type III life jackets provide 22 pounds (100 Newtons) of flotation.  Type III foam life jackets are comfortable and popular for those wearing them as all times.  Inflatable type III’s inflatables offer higher flotation and even greater comfort and are popular for wearing at all times.

Type IV: Throwable Devices:

Cushions or ring buoys are designed to be thrown to someone in trouble and provide backup to a PFD. They are not for non-swimmers, rough waters or the unconscious. The USCG does not require these for dinghies, canoes, kayaks.  These are not worn like a life jacket, generally just held onto by someone in the water.  Type IV ring buoys provide 16.5 pounds (75 Newtons) of flotation, and throwable boat cushions provide 18 pounds (82 Newtons) of flotation

Type V: Special-use Devices:

These are specialized PFDs for specific activities. To be acceptable by the USCG, they must be used for the activity specified on the label. Varieties include sailing, kayaking, water skiing, windsurfing, hybrid vests and deck suits.  For sailing these generally consist of inflatable life jackets with harnesses, or over the head entry foam life jackets for dinghy sailing.  Type V life jackets provide 15.5 – 22 pounds (70 – 100 Newtons) of flotation, while inflatable type V life jackets provide 22 – 34 pounds (100 – 155 Newtons) of flotation.  These vests will usually be labeled either ‘Type V with Type II performance’ or ‘Type V with Type III performance’.  The label will also specify what specific ‘Special use’ the life jacket is designed for.