[PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic foam.

Sat Jun 24 22:52:05 EDT 2017

Pete,Not sure what your planning, but I have 8 AGM 6v and two extra for my travel motors.  Unless your planning long transits, you can drop 4 batteries.  With the efficiencies  found in lighting etc, 8 batteries is lots.  Can you move your batteries forward a pinch.Hank 

    On Saturday, June 24, 2017 8:47 PM, Pete Niedermayr via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

 Yeah it's 42 " but with 12 batteries aft it puts me ass heavy and I need 1200 lbs to balance it which put me over budget ballast wise. 
--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 6/24/17, hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic foam.
 To: "Personal Submersibles General Discussion" <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
 Date: Saturday, June 24, 2017, 8:11 PM

 Pete,A
 lottery win would help ,lol.  I will not rotate the sphere,
 I will launch it with me in it, in the correct orientation.
   I will go old school with the batteries and use oil
 filled lead acid, for simplicity and low cost.  Personally
 if I were building a K350 variant, I would not  bother with
 pods, I would have AGM internal batteries.  Again for cost,
 simplicity and speed of construction, increase the hull
 diameter to 42 inches while your at it.   Emile has the
 perfect set up, I would copy that.Hank

    On Saturday, June 24, 2017 7:00 PM, Pete
 Niedermayr via Personal_Submersibles
 <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

  WOW !
 Are you going to rotate the sphere to have the port ( I
 assume you mean View Port) where you want it ?
 You
 seem to have cracked quite a few nuts that challenged
 Psubbers.
 What
 about 

 Thru
 hulls for control, power, life support, comm, etc.
 Battery
 banks ( I'm especially interested in this. I am working
 on a design of a K350 variant and I don't the like
 battery pods

 Thrusters 
 and compansation.
 I
 hope you win the lottery some day.

  From: hank pronk via
 Personal_Submersibles
 <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>

 To: Personal
 Submersibles General Discussion
 <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> 

 Sent:
 Saturday, June 24, 2017 6:38 PM
  Subject: Re:
 [PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic foam.

 Hi Pete,Elementary
 12,000  will have a 48 inch by  3.25 in thick occupant
 sphere 516-70 steel, and it will weigh 8,000 lbs.  The port
 and hatch will be combined, and the hatch land will be a
 bolt in place part.  I will machine the conical opening
 with my own flange facing machine.  If I achieve the
 accuracy with the land that  I have with Elementary, 3000
 that will be great, if not then I will have it re-machined
 professionally.  The new sphere will go in place of the
 sphere in Elementary 3000 and all the parts will be swapped
 out.  That is the plan Hank

    On Saturday, June 24,
 2017 2:22 PM, Pete Niedermayr via Personal_Submersibles
 <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

  Hank, What are your preliminary hull specs for
 Elementary 12000?
 --------------------------------------------
 On Fri, 6/23/17, Alan via
 Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
 wrote:

  Subject: Re:
 [PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic foam.
  To: "Personal Submersibles General
 Discussion" <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  Date: Friday, June 23,
 2017, 8:44 PM

  Hank,yes the gas tanks
 may
  be expensive. You
 could possibly make
  a
 series of boxes for the petrol. Make a box out
  ofmarine
  ply, seal it with epoxy,
 drill a couple of holes in the
  bottom & glue ina flexible membrane
  across the inside bottom
 of the box. Then seal a top
  on with a

 valve for filling. Just brain storming here!Alan

  Sent
  from my iPad
  On
  24/06/2017, at 1:12 PM,
 hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles
  <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:

  Alan,Those
  look amazing and
 expensive.  I am not saying it is not
  doable, I am just
 very nervous due to lack of
  knowledge.  I am sure with proper engineering
 and safety
  grounding
 it can be safe.  I would go with CNG type 4 tanks
  before I did gasoline.
  I can buy one brand new tank that
  will provide all the
 buoyancy I need for 2,500-3,000  or I
  can buy a used tank that
 is current until 2030 for 1,100
  dollars plus shipping.  Also the CNG tank only
 adds 105 lbs
  plus
 compressed air weight to the  dry weight, making the
  sub easy to lift onto the
 deck of my proposed landing
  craft.Hank

      On Friday, June
 23,
  2017 6:32 PM, Alan
 James via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:

   Hank,I had
  another quick Google on
 collapsible petrol

 containers.There
  is a
 huge variety, with manufacturers offering tailor
  made products.Here
  is a news item about them
 using them on the jetpack. They
  have a collapsible
  fuel tank strapped to their
 back.http://www.atlinc.com/newsreleases.htmlAlan

    From: hank pronk
 via

 Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
   To: Personal
  Submersibles General
 Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>

   Sent: Saturday, June
  24, 2017 11:16 AM
   Subject: Re:
  [PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic
 foam.

  Alan,I am
  still considering that
 idea but Sean said NO ;-(   It is
  cheap and I would have
 lots of exta buoyancy.  This is good
  for Elementary 3,000 but
 not Elementary 12,000.  I want to
  explore all ideas,  and
 will end up where I started with
  spheres in epoxy ;-)Hank

      On Friday, June 23,
 2017 5:01 PM,
  Alan via
 Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:

   Hank,what happened to
 your
  idea of using
 composite tanks pressurised with
  air?As long

 as they were in test & you had multiple tanks, with a
  drop weight thatcould
 compensate for
  one
 failing, that would be ok wouldn't it?If you were
 filling to
  3000psi,
 they wouldn't see external pressure till
  6000ft.You
  could always test the
 idea at Nuytco.Alan

  Sent from my iPad
  On
  24/06/2017, at 10:17 AM,
 hank pronk via

 Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:

  LOL,I
  checked on
 the compressibility and it will compress
  .5 percent, per 1,000 psi
  same as hydraulic oil.   I have
  weighed two types of
 Olive oil today and the specific
  gravity is actually .86g\cc  so it is to
 heavy.  I
  can't
 seem to find the light weight stuff .703g\cc
    if you buy in bulk it
 is 5 dollars per kg  so
  far.I am

 not even sure I can drive down the road with that much
 gas,
  mind you it would
 be hidden behind panels on the sub.  Then
  there is the expansion
 while it sits in the hot weather.
   If the tree huggers heard about it they would
 crap in
  their pants
 and chase me down, luckily my truck can out run
  a VW van lol.Hank

      On Friday, June
 23,
  2017 3:53 PM, Alan
 via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:

   Hank,is that extra
 virgin or
  cold
 pressed? I wonder if it compressesunder
  pressure.Olive oil would
 be an
  expensive way to
 go. Whereas petrol costsnothing if you re-use
  it. Not
  sure why you fear
 gasoline; they let women pump it in to
  their cars
  at gas stations!Cheers
 Alan
  Sent
  from my iPad
  On
  24/06/2017, at 4:21 AM,
 hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles
  <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:

  Alec,Thank
  you, I should have bought
 those instead of the 11 inch,
  grrrr.  I could go with those floats, but I do
 hope to
  build the next
 generation  Elementary sub.  I want to
  figure out the whole foam
 thing and possibly carry it over
  to the next sub.  Alan has really intrigued me
 with using
  gasoline, I
 am terrified of that idea but it has caused me
  to stumble onto another
 liquid.  In searching I have
  discovered that Olive Oil is even lighter
  than gasoline, and
 obviously safer for me and the
  environment.  I have no idea yet if it is an
 option, I only

 stumbled onto it this morning.   If anyone knows of a
 bad
  reason to use
 Olive Oil, please let me know.  Olive Oil is
  .703 g\cc and I can
 put it into plastic containers that
  are .93 g\cc Hank

      On Friday, June
 23,
  2017 9:28 AM, Alec
 Smyth via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:

   Actually there are
  trawl floats rated to
 1800m. That should have you covered
  Hank! Check out #629
 below.
  http://trawlworks.com/floats.html

  Best,

  Alec
  On Mon, Jun 19, 2017
 at
  1:21 PM, Brian Cox
 via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
  wrote:
  These guys have
 14"
  spherical
 buoys rated to 800 meters   - $120.00    with
  a positive buoyancy of 39
 #    they are not syntactic. 
  The syntactics start at 30" in dia

  http://www.mooringsystems.com/

 buoyancy.htm   Brian 
  --- personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org wrote:

  From: james
  cottrell via
 Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org>
  To:
  Personal Submersibles
 General Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org>
  Subject: Re:
 [PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic
  foam.
  Date:
 Mon, 19 Jun 2017 16:52:56
  +0000 (UTC)

  Deep sea glass floats
 are rated for 10,000

 psi
  http://teledynebenthos.com/

 product/flotation_instrument_ housings/flotation-glass-
  spheres

  Greg

  From: Alan via
  Personal_Submersibles
 <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org>
   To: Personal
  Submersibles General
 Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> 
   Sent: Monday, June
 12,
  2017 6:18 PM
   Subject: Re:
  [PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic
 foam.

  Hank,if you
  are getting 3lb of
 floatation per gallon then you need
  184gallons of gas. 184 x
 3 = 552 ( near

 enough).Cheers Alan

  Sent from my iPad
  On 13/06/2017, at 9:50
 AM, hank pronk via

 Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

  Alan,I need 550 lbs
 flotation  and one imp
  gallon of water is 10 lbs and gas is 7 lbs that
 gives me 3
  lbs
 buoyancy per imp gallon that means I need 1650 gallons
  of gas.Hank

      On Monday, June
 12,
  2017 3:43 PM, Alan
 via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

  Hank,are you sure
 that's
  right!That
 would give 1900kg of floatation (
  nearly 2 ton)That is based on gasoline being
 .71
  of the weight of
 water. So every litreof gas
  gives you about 290 grams of
 floatation. Metric

 system is much easier for calculating these
  things.Cheers Alan

  Sent from my iPad
  On 12/06/2017, at 11:42
 PM, hank pronk via

 Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

  Alan,Those
  are nice, I can see other
 uses for them.  If I use
  gasoline, I would need about  1,750 imperial
 gallons for

 Elementary.    I was mistaken about the  liquid
 paraffin,
  gasoline is
 better. 

      On Sunday, June
 11,
  2017 11:36 PM,
 Alan via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

   Maybe
  something like this
 collapsable plastic fuel
  tank, inside a protective fibreglass housing,
 or
  a grate
 arrangement.  https://www.bdoutdoors.com/

 atl-fuel-bladder-extra/Alan
  Sent from my iPad
  On 12/06/2017, at 12:28 PM, hank pronk via
  Personal_Submersibles
 <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

  Alan,Yes I
  have, it is very simple
 and effective.  There are of coarse
  some hazardous
 logistical problems not to
  mention environmental concerns.  I would opt
 for
  diesel fuel to
 reduce the fire hazard.  Any time you have
  plastic and gas it is
 dangerous.  Last week I did a barge
  job replacing dock
 piles.  When I walked up and down the
  plastic dock floats,
 every time I touched the steel piles I
  got a spark.  Actually
 Liquid paraffin is even better at
  .8g\ccHank 

      On
 Sunday, June 11,
  2017
 5:32 PM, Alan via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

  Hank,have you looked at
 using
  gasoline?More
 volume required for the same
  floatation as syntactic foam,but apart from
 the
  holding tanks it
 would cost you nothing, as
  youcould use it after the dive. If you
 designed
  right you
 could fill the tanksat your
  destination.Alan

  Sent from
 my iPad
  On 12/06/2017,
 at 6:03 AM, hank pronk via
  Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

  Greg,that sounds good,
  I would love to find a
 more cost effective foam.  I still
  want to build one more
 sub that goes much deeper, but the
  foam cost is not
 manageable.  I estimate I can build a
   Titanic capable sub
  for 100,000 and 80,000 of that is
  foam.  ;-(Hank

      On Sunday, June
 11,
  2017 8:29 AM, hank
 pronk via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

   Greg,There has to be
 good reason to make foam by
  other means than standard practices.   Cost
 would be the
  biggest
 reason, and using wax will probably work, but is
  there a saving?  Using
 wax means you have to use a
  deeper rated sphere to offset the loss of
 reinforcement
  provided
 by the resin.  I have no idea what the cost
  difference would be. 
 Maybe the cost is still much
  better.  When I look at Cliff's report, the
 resin is
  not the
 expensive part.  Perhaps the direction should be,
  to look for a replacement
 for the spheres.  In Cliff's
  report it shows the resin triples the
 sphere's

 performance.  That implies that the true strength comes
  from the resin.  Maybe a
 sawdust resin or a styrofoam
  granule resin is worth looking at also.  Maybe
 it is a
  simple as air
 entrained resin?Fun to

 think about anyways.Hank 

      On
 Sunday, June 11,
  2017
 6:22 AM, hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

   Hi Scott,Thanks
  for the offer, but I need
 foam for 3,000

 feet.Hank 

      On Saturday, June
 10,
  2017 9:03 PM,
 Scott Waters via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> wrote:

  Hank,
  Hola from Costa Rica!
  Depends on if they are
 glass or
  carbon fiber
 spheres and what size they are. They are all
  pretty durable. We are
 actually cutting up the foam on
  Pisces and reattaching it to get the shapes we
  want. 
  I do have a
  ton of syntactic foam
 that is cert to 400m that I'd sell
  you for super cheap. Like
 all of it for $200

 Thanks,Scott
  Waters

  Sent from my
  U.S. Cellular®
 Smartphone
  --------
 Original message

 --------From: hank pronk via
  Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> Date: 6/10/17 
 12:38 PM  (GMT-06:00)

 To: Personal Submersibles General Discussion
  <personal_submersibles at psubs.
  org> Subject:
 [PSUBS-MAILIST] syntactic
  foam. 
  I
 have an idea, but not sure if it will work. 
  My idea is to fill a
 neutrally buoyant container with macro
  and micro spheres. 
 After the container is as full as
  possible, then fill with an environmentally
 friendly oil. 
  This
 would be more buoyant than using a resin and less
  complicated and
 cheaper.  My concern is, how well will the
  spheres stand up against
 breaking from being in contact with
  the other spheres and the
 container.   Are these spheres
  delicate?

  Hank______________________________
  _________________
  Personal_Submersibles
  mailing list
  Personal_Submersibles at psubs.
  org
  http://www.psubs.org/mailman/
  listinfo.cgi/personal_
 submersibles