Corsetabiity Targets

WAIST TARGETS

Compliments of Jamie

Here is a little math, contributed by Marianne, that tentatively relates waist
size to weight and height:

1. Because the density of the body is almost a constant, the weight can be taken as a good estimate of body volume.
2. The average cross-sectional area of the body then equals: Weight/Height.
3. The average 'diameter' of the body and the natural waist size can then expected to be approximately proportional to the square root of that area.

                                              We end up with the formula:

Natural waist size = K*Squareroot(Weight/Height), where K is a gender-dependent constant.

For women, using kilograms and meters for the weight and height, respectively, K may have a value around 11; anyway, K should be found from representative example data.


Estimation of "natural" waist sizes

I should like to add to the mathematics proffered by Marianne (above), which I found very interesting but potentially confusing.  Not as confusing as figuring out the interest on a Title Max title loan, but still a little bit hard to understand. Since the height is in the denominator of the calculation, the trend will be for a tall person to have a narrower waist for any given body weight. So much is clear and acceptable but how far can it go? Would we expect a 6ft woman weighing 98 lbs to have a natural waist of 19 inches, say?

The constant K that she introduces may be a bit of a mystery to many readers, so I thought I’d test out the sort of value which may fit. Then I could derive a table of "natural" waists, whatever that means in a world of changing fashions, diet, fitness and so on. I have used Imperial/American units rather than metrics.

I have measured 28 women members of my family or else the partners of friends and colleagues. You will see that I have some obliging women relatives and friends! The results are as in Table 1:

Table 1:  Estimation of the K-constant

Sample

Number in sample

Height of all in sample to nearest inch

Average weight (lbs)

Average waist (ins)

Value of constant K

A

4

60

138

30

19.7

B

9

64

161

31

19.6

C*

4

66

131

28

19.8

D

6

66

189

33

19.6

E

5

68

165

31

20.1

 

[28]

       

Averages

 

64.9

160.1

30.9

19.7

* these were four noticeably slim women of the same height
these were four BBWs of the same height again


Of course, this is a set of small samples but the results are remarkably consistent. For women in a range of socio-economic groups, the constant K varies from 19.6 to 20.1; a variation of only 2.5 per cent.

If this average value of K is introduced into a model for all women from heights 5ft to 6ft 2in, the results are as in Table 2. The sample results are highlighted in a different colour (within a pound weight or two) to indicate the closeness to the model: compare with the figures in Table 1. As we say in England, they are "spot on", which I think indicates the validity of the model.

The implications of Table 2 are far-reaching. A "natural" waist size less than 28 inches seems to indicate a very slim woman indeed. Conversely, the commonest waist size predicted by the model is around 33 inches and I wonder if that accords with the experience of many modern women.

The commonest girdle sizes sold by mail order are (UK) sizes XL (30-32 inches) and 2XL (34-36 inches) but these are widely regarded as minority sales items in the sense that most women do not wear girdles. I should be interested to hear the opinions of other corset and girdle observers if these sales sizes reflect the fact of the typical feminine figure today.

Table 2: Predicted "natural" waist measurements (in inches).

 

 

 

 

height

 

 

 

 

weight

pounds

inches

inches

inches

inches

inches

inches

inches

inches

 

60

62

64

66

68

70

72

74

 

104

26

26

25

25

24

24

24

23

111

27

26

26

26

25

25

25

24

118

28

27

27

26

26

26

25

25

125

29

28

28

27

27

26

26

26

132

29

29

28

28

28

27

27

26

139

30

30

29

29

28

28

28

27

146

31

30

30

29

29

29

28

28

153

32

31

31

30

30

29

29

28

160

32

32

31

31

30

30

30

29

167

33

32

32

31

31

31

30

30

174

34

33

33

32

32

31

31

30

181

34

34

33

33

32

32

31

31

188

35

34

34

33

33

32

32

32

195

36

35

35

34

34

33

33

32

202

36

36

35

35

34

34

33

33

209

37

36

36

35

35

34

34

33

216

38

37

36

36

35

35

34

34

223

38

38

37

36

36

35

35

34

As LISA readers will imagine, I found this a fascinating experiment, and hope that it is of interest to anyone planning to train a waist. In conjunction with the "Table of Permanent Corsetability" above, I believe it gives useful starting and target sizes for the waist of the enthusiast and her partner. My thanks to Marianne, for suggesting this analysis.


Hip-to-waist ratio calculator (spring). 


  Return to LISA.'s Main Page