"Fizzy water" Redo Extra Data Falling from height into water

I am suspecting that the density of the bubbling may be key to this.
"How far down" the turbulence goes may also be key.
If the surface is very turbulent but only to a depth of say one foot, your going to hit a layer of very hard water under that layer, and that may as well be the same as hitting still water surface.

Therefore, how far down the turbulence goes may be a factor.


I am having an idea.
There are already pumps that circulate water in ponds and tanks that can have air pumped into the outflow.
Maybe its an idea to use these pumps in a rough circle to induce flow and air into a ring at varying heights to see how the change of heigh of the turbulence underwater changes up the results, alongside the change of height.

If testing, Take into consideration that an air pump has to be a lot beefier to pump air down six foot that it does to do two foot depth... my own pond air pump has a max working depth of four foot, but that over-taxes the pump after a while, so I only use it at two foot max.

If they are using Jamies old rig, that wont matter will it, it managed air in the deep end of a pool.
Perhaps that could be remodelled into a inward facing ring [or square?..] that could be used as a drop target and raised and lowered as required?..


I am also keen to understand how the turbulence may affect a water entry by a human...
You would have to go full SCUBA gear, but, dropping into water that has turbulence in it, does that "Confuse" which way is up to a diver?.. being that viability will be totally impaired.

Will a deeper survivable dive into turbulence that doesnt KSI on impact be survivable if you go too seep to be able to surface with no air?.

Heck, on initial though, I believed a softer landing would be a simple thing to test.
Any more suggestions?.. anyone?..

And yes the original proposal that canoeing over a waterfall does matter, its the angle of descent, it has to be such that you dont somersault in mid air or impact on surface that traps you underwater, and doesnt create a "Stopper" wave that traps you in a washing machine circular current that prevents you surfacing.
Investigation of the landing zone is key, you have to know if there is a sizeable boulder just under the surface that will spoil the day?.

All things considered, I would be rather careful about mass water flow to create the turbulence.
Unless you have a "Tame" waterfall to play with that is?..
Whereas, it may be easy for the white-water canoe "canyon" that is a pumped circuit doing thousands-of-gallons-a-second that they used in the UK for the last Olympics, getting that kind of flow and being ale to control it successfully is down to a fine art that I do not expect the MB's to be able to replicate in the given time they have, maybe this 7 day schedule that Cyber has suggested, that restricts how long they have to plan and film a section.

Yes you "Could" get the Fire service to pump out and recirculate water through a fire truck... however, you may need several trucks to get the kind of water flow you would be getting over a waterfall.

This is why I have suggested the MB's old rig that they used to make a fizzy water pond, just the air, controllable, turn-off able in seconds, and no concerning currents that may drag things "Downstream"...

Waterproof electronics I would have thought a "Must" for fine detail of how much de-acceleration is applied.

Use of a ladder to drop a dummy, not a good plan, the dummy in question may have to be strapped into a canoe, and sod that if you think I am climbing a ladder with a canoe strapped to my back...
I am suggesting cherry picker platform may be best.
Perhaps two, one set at a set height as a launch platform, one used as a lift to get there?.

"In the real world" its a real turbulent current that can rip you underneath and hold you there underwater in that "stopper" wave for quite a while.
The hypothesis is that the air in the water makes it compressible to sudden shock of a falling object that would allow you to drop from "greater height" with minimum damage.
I suspect that to replicate the flow of a waterfall, you may need a dozen or so of your Bronto's pumps?.
Yes you can hire large pumps that they use to empty out dry docs, but again, the flow of water will create currents that may skew the results, and unless the object has a clear path to flow with the right current away from the falls, thats maybe just getting too complicated right about now?.
However, one single air compressor can create enough air in the water to "proof of concept", and then maybe when thats done, replicate the height of a known waterfall to test, and then go large scale with a real waterfall.

Erm, Do you want your test equipment back?.
The flow of water is an entirely different test.

Lets start this discussion again.
I may need to be slightly pedantic, but, the original purpose of the thread, was to discuss the idea that having large amounts of air "Dissolved" in the water, or even present in the water as air pockets, may be the reason why you can fall from a greater height into a basin of water "Without sudden de-acceleration", but still slow down enough to not hit the bottom.

Whereas it has been agreed already that the flow of water over a waterfall may indeed be the very process in how the water gets so "aerated", we have a slight problem in that unless you have a lot of industrial size water pumps about the place, re-creating the flow of a large waterfall would be problematic, and hard to test, away from an actual waterfall.

But having an old air pump machine lying about the place, maybe from the last time they tested "Fizzy water", if Jamie or Adam are willing for the new team to borrow such, would be extremely easy to test the idea of the air presence being the key to the idea.

If you want to test flowing water, find a river with a steep downgrade.
Its sill going to hurt when you drop in.
The "Difference" is the addition of Air, yes, created by large amounts of water dropping over the fall, but its the actual AIR in the water thats "Supposed" to allow some compression of an otherwise uncompressable fluid in that having the air in the water takes out some of the usual shock.

In the progress of the actual science behind this, I am isolating the air component to test true[]false[] of that component.

Dropping a canoe into a fast flowing body of water is bloody dangerous, especially if it is a white water situation, control is a bonus, I am trying to avoid that until it gets to full scale, where you are going to need a trained canoeist.

"By George, I think he's got it"....