ileostomy bags...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ileostomy bags...
I have an ileostomy, which was done last December. The CAA were excellent, and I was back flying within 5 weeks. What I was wondering is whether or not there are any other colleagues out there flying around with ileostomy bags, which have been "depressurisation" tested? Do you have any written evidence of their testing?
I have contacted all of the large manufacturers (Dansac, Coloplast etc.) but have yet to find any that seem to have ever been asked the question! I am awaiting 10 or so managers to call me back
I know they are fine flying day to day, but I have a need to demonstrate depressurisation behaviour.
Thank you for any help!
SKP
I have contacted all of the large manufacturers (Dansac, Coloplast etc.) but have yet to find any that seem to have ever been asked the question! I am awaiting 10 or so managers to call me back
I know they are fine flying day to day, but I have a need to demonstrate depressurisation behaviour.Thank you for any help!
SKP
No I have never heard of such testing, but I am not sure why you are concerned. Millions of passengers with bags fly without any problems. Any liquid will not significantly change in volume. The only problem would be with any gas in the bag itself which will expand with depressurisation. Can you not simply lift the ring before flying and release any gas? Changes in diet such as reducing beans may be of benefit but copious gas is not a complaint I hear from my patients.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radgirl,
As I said, I know they are fine....I fly with them currently, however I have been asked by my management to provide some depressurisation evidence.
The manufacturers agree that the question is a good one, so it may generate something useful.
As a note the UK RAF have depressurisation tested Dansac ref:341, however these bags are ancient, and I have been unable to find anything out, off the RAF for anything more recent.
SKP
As I said, I know they are fine....I fly with them currently, however I have been asked by my management to provide some depressurisation evidence.
The manufacturers agree that the question is a good one, so it may generate something useful.
As a note the UK RAF have depressurisation tested Dansac ref:341, however these bags are ancient, and I have been unable to find anything out, off the RAF for anything more recent.
SKP
I'm just trying to work out the physics, forgive my naivety but does depressurisation involve a sudden increase or decrease in ambient (outside) pressure.
I doubt you'll get much joy from the appliance companies, they won't research it if there is no money in it.
You may have to do some extrapolation.
Without wishing to be flippant, those cellophane wrapped bread rolls that they serve with them dodgy airline meals seem to withstand anything.
What's the main worry of the CAA in terms of your functionality?
I doubt you'll get much joy from the appliance companies, they won't research it if there is no money in it.
You may have to do some extrapolation.
Without wishing to be flippant, those cellophane wrapped bread rolls that they serve with them dodgy airline meals seem to withstand anything.
What's the main worry of the CAA in terms of your functionality?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gingernut,
RTFQ. The CAA have no issue. Its management.
When the cabin pressurisation fails, (sudden depressurisation ie. door failure) the cabin altitude can go from 6,000ft to 41,000ft in a matter of seconds. Now consider the physics.
Gas expands at a terrific rate….can the valve/filter in the appliance keep up?
I'm sure they will not want to research it, so I may end up doing my own tests in a hypobaric-chamber.
And no, the bread roll wrapper doesn't really compare
SKP
RTFQ.
The CAA have no issue. Its management.When the cabin pressurisation fails, (sudden depressurisation ie. door failure) the cabin altitude can go from 6,000ft to 41,000ft in a matter of seconds. Now consider the physics.
Gas expands at a terrific rate….can the valve/filter in the appliance keep up?
I'm sure they will not want to research it, so I may end up doing my own tests in a hypobaric-chamber.
And no, the bread roll wrapper doesn't really compare
SKP
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steak&kidney.
It might be worth getting in touch with your local Uni Mech Eng or Bio engineering Dept.
It actually sounds like a cracking Msc Project. Especially if you can give them a supply of bags, I am sure they can find there own **** substitute which they can inject their substitute fart into.
Just off the top of my head once you prove that the thing won't explode the next thing they will be asking about is oxygen being in close proximity to a bust bag and if there is going to be any flash fires due to the methane which will be in the poo ie fart..
Might be worth contact Genghis the engineer on Pprune, he used to be an Academic and might know of someone that would be interested in helping.
Just to note before you start think piece of piss go sit in a chamber and see what happens.
You can laugh about the methane bit but I used to do mixed gas diving and people have been badly burned when high PP of O2 have managed to get themselves near any form of hydro carbon including bacon fat from the morning buttie on 4 day old stubble when testing regs.
Anything to do with humans and animals being experimented on has to go through an ethics committee and a whole heap of checks and measures. So its not as easy as you would think. If you go down the bio engineering route you will get a lot more sensible methods than if you get the medics involved.
you need to sit down with someone that knows about **** and its properties at that point it comes out your bowl. Then look for the dangers, off the top of my head its expansion of the gasses, hydrocarbons and the operation of the valve with higher than designed for pressures forcing the ****e through.
But that's just off the top of my head.
Would make quite a nice project to be honest better than some of the rubbish meaningless MSc projects out there.
It might be worth getting in touch with your local Uni Mech Eng or Bio engineering Dept.
It actually sounds like a cracking Msc Project. Especially if you can give them a supply of bags, I am sure they can find there own **** substitute which they can inject their substitute fart into.
Just off the top of my head once you prove that the thing won't explode the next thing they will be asking about is oxygen being in close proximity to a bust bag and if there is going to be any flash fires due to the methane which will be in the poo ie fart..
Might be worth contact Genghis the engineer on Pprune, he used to be an Academic and might know of someone that would be interested in helping.
Just to note before you start think piece of piss go sit in a chamber and see what happens.
You can laugh about the methane bit but I used to do mixed gas diving and people have been badly burned when high PP of O2 have managed to get themselves near any form of hydro carbon including bacon fat from the morning buttie on 4 day old stubble when testing regs.
Anything to do with humans and animals being experimented on has to go through an ethics committee and a whole heap of checks and measures. So its not as easy as you would think. If you go down the bio engineering route you will get a lot more sensible methods than if you get the medics involved.
you need to sit down with someone that knows about **** and its properties at that point it comes out your bowl. Then look for the dangers, off the top of my head its expansion of the gasses, hydrocarbons and the operation of the valve with higher than designed for pressures forcing the ****e through.
But that's just off the top of my head.
Would make quite a nice project to be honest better than some of the rubbish meaningless MSc projects out there.
Last edited by mad_jock; 21st Apr 2014 at 14:01.
