[PSUBS-MAILIST] pressure test
Alec Smyth
alecsmyth at gmail.com
Wed Oct 23 08:52:33 EDT 2013
Hi Hank,
I asked at Carderock over a decade ago and was told the cost would depend
on setup time, which varies depending on how much instrumentation you want
during the test, but that a typical figure was around $27K. Waaaay beyond
my budget. Dale Heinzing tested Snoopy somewhere on the West side of Canada
at a lumber yard. Snoopy went in the tank alongside the lumber and must
have been pretty well disinfected, but the scary bit was that they released
the pressure almost instantaneously, with a bang. That test was to only
400' so not really sufficient for a Nekton, but it might still be of
interest since I think it's relatively close to you and probably was
inexpensive.
Best,
Alec
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Joe Perkel <josephperkel at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hank,
>
> There are two in the states however, the one on the west coast has a 72"
> limit if I recall correctly.
> The other on the east coast, is the same one used for the k-600 and Alvin.
>
> A contract and waiver are required, let us know the cost if you do it.
> Go to the WHOI website for info
>
>
> Joe
>
> *From:* hank pronk <hanker_20032000 at yahoo.ca>
>
> *To:* Personal Submersibles General Discussion <
> personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 23, 2013 8:10 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] pressure test
>
> Does anyone know if the is a pressure chamber large enough to test my
> Nekton submarine in the Pacific North West.
> Hank
>
> *From:* Phil Nuytten <phil at philnuytten.com>
> *To:* Personal Submersibles General Discussion <
> personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:19:38 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
>
> Hi, Hugh
> As Vance says, HY80 is somewhat challenging to weld – err, actually,
> that’s an understatement. We had to work with our fabricators to come up
> with a whole weld procedure to satisfy our classing agency. If you decide
> to go this route, let me know and we will share that procedure.
> Phil
>
> *From:* vbra676539 at aol.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 22, 2013 7:18 PM
> *To:* personal_submersibles at psubs.org
> *Subject:* Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
>
> I think it is somewhat demanding to weld, and expensive by comparison,
> of course. That said, there is a mountain of data available, as the
> pressure hulls of most modern US Navy submarines are built out of it.
> Vance
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hugh Fulton <hc.fulton at gmail.com>
> To: 'Personal Submersibles General Discussion' <
> personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
> Sent: Tue, Oct 22, 2013 10:15 pm
> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
>
> Vance, Yep that sounds about right.
> Are there any nasties to using it?
> Chs Hugh
>
>
>
> *From:* Personal_Submersibles [
> mailto:personal_submersibles-bounces at psubs.org?<personal_submersibles-bounces at psubs.org?>]
> *On Behalf Of *Vance Bradley
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2013 1:37 p.m.
> *To:* Personal Submersibles General Discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
>
> Hugh,
> HY-80 used to maintain the standard dimensions of a DW2000 with 50%
> depth increase.
> Vance
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 22, 2013, at 8:13 PM, "Hugh Fulton" <hc.fulton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Vance, I am sure I saw recently from Phil that he was using HY 80 but I
> don’t know what on. I did a calc on mine and I got a lot deeper using the
> HY 80 specs over the Grade 70.
> Hugh
>
> *From:* Personal_Submersibles [
> mailto:personal_submersibles-bounces at psubs.org<personal_submersibles-bounces at psubs.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *vbra676539 at aol.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2013 11:55 a.m.
> *To:* personal_submersibles at psubs.org
> *Subject:* Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
>
> One other thing comes to mind on this. Phil uses A516Gr70 in the
> DW2000s. It occurs to me that if there was a demonstrable benefit to A537,
> he would have used taken advantage of it. And he didn't, apparently.
> Interesting. Don't know why, though. Maybe it has something to do with
> welding stainless inserts in and the heat treatment thereof. Just a guess.
> Vance
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JimToddPsub <JimToddPsub at aol.com>
> To: personal_submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
> Sent: Tue, Oct 22, 2013 6:42 pm
> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
> Vance,
> From Leeco Steel's website:
>
> A537 plate steel is heat-treated. As a result, it displays greater yield
> and tensile strength than the more standard A516 grades. *A537 steel plate
> * is ideal for both in boilers and pressure vessels, and is used in the
> oil, gas and petrochemical industry.
>
> Nice to see it provides at least a brief comparison to A516. I'm sure
> there are more variables to consider including cost.
>
> Jim
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2013 5:23:43 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> vbra676539 at aol.com writes:
>
> Jim,
> A537 was used extensively, as well, especially in the early boats that
> Perry built. Maybe you can figure it out. It seems that I recall being told
> that it was somewhat harder to weld but had better
> cold-water-under-pressure properties. Maybe Dr. Nuytten would weigh in on
> this, assuming he isn't up to his ass in DW3000 alligators this week (which
> I suspect he is).
> Vance
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JimToddPsub <JimToddPsub at aol.com>
> To: personal_submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
> Sent: Tue, Oct 22, 2013 4:18 pm
> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
> Greg,
> I should have clarified that. It was a cut-and-paste from a web site.
> I'm more of a librarian in that I save info in an organized fashion when I
> come across it so I'll have it available later when the need arises. That
> was the case in this instance.
> Jim
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2013 1:25:34 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> jgcottrell2002 at yahoo.com writes:
>
> Thanks for the info, Jim. It's good to know there is some one in the
> group that is also in the steel industry.
>
> Greg
>
> *From:* "JimToddPsub at aol.com" <JimToddPsub at aol.com>
> *To:* personal_submersibles at psubs.org
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 22, 2013 12:59 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Best Steel to use for Sub Hull
>
> Maybe more detail than you really want to know, but here goes:
>
> ASTM A 516 or ASME SA 516 grade is one of the most popular steel grades
> in market .
>
> It is primarily intended for use in welded pressure vessels where notch
> toughness is important. It comes in four grades 55, 60, 65 & 70. At Oakley
> Steel we mainly sell 516 gr 60 and 516 gr 70. These grades cover a range of
> tensile strengths from 55 - 90 MPa and this versatility explains much of
> the specifications popularity.
>
> For plates thinner than 40mm we normally supply them as rolled. Plates
> supplied above 40mm thick are normalised.
>
> For A 516 grade 70, which is one of our most popular steels, the ASME
> standard composition is as follows (dependent on grade):
>
> Carbon 0.27 - 0.31%
> Manganese 0.79 - 1.3%
> Phosphorous 0.035% max
> Sulphur 0.035% max
> Silicon 0.13 - 0.45%
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2013 11:53:12 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> jonw at psubs.org writes:
>
>
> Generally, A516gr70 suffices for personal or recreational submarines.
>
> Jon
>
>
> On 10/22/2013 12:45 PM, Christopher Cave wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> What is the best steel to use for a submarine hull. Someone mentioned
> marine steel such as 316,316L or 317. Any suggestions or a website I can
> review.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
> *Christopher Cave
> *
> *christophercave at yahoo.com*
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 8951 (20131022) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com/
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 8952 (20131022) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 8952 (20131022) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com/
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 8952 (20131022) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing listPersonal_Submersibles at psubs.orghttp://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20131023/188aba4e/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Personal_Submersibles
mailing list