[PSUBS-MAILIST] pressure test

hank pronk hanker_20032000 at yahoo.ca
Wed Oct 23 17:21:19 EDT 2013 

Sorry, I meant Nuytco


From: hank pronk <hanker_20032000 at yahoo.ca>
To: Personal Submersibles General Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 3:00:35 PM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] pressure test



Alec,
I just heard from Dr Newton at Nutco and their  chamber is to small for my Nekton sub but the cost is very reasonable at 1,500 to 2,500 dollars depending on time. 
Hank

From: Alec Smyth <alecsmyth at gmail.com>
To: Personal Submersibles General Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 6:52:33 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] pressure test



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?] 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] 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 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20131023/181bd0e6/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Personal_Submersibles mailing list