[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] OSS spec sheet
Exactly what I meant.!! If the hull is encased with ballast tank, to
streamline the shape (like German VII for example) then one could purchase
a pipe flange (bolts on the outside) rather than making one. An external
stiffener is just as valid as an internal one. But it would be more
difficult to take apart (due to the ballast tank in the way). Also more
difficult to inspect the bolts. However it would be far cheaper. I am
trying to find links. The inside bolts is far nicer, but impossible to
find commercialy (I think anyway) , due to the fact that people rarely want
to un-bolt pressure vessels from inside. In fact rare;y do they want to
climb inside one. LOL. Pipe Flanges would be far cheaper than making one.
For the diameter debate, I vote in for 36" - 48" line pipe for pressure
hull. I want to be able to sit upright, but also able to pull with my
truck. Maybe the batteries would be a seperate load to keep the weight down
and add batteries at launch site. Safety drop weight as well??
Comments?
Jay.
MerlinSub@t-online.de
(Carsten Standfuss) To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sent by: cc:
owner-personal_submersible Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] OSS spec sheet
s@psubs.org
15/01/2003 11:25 AM
Please respond to
personal_submersibles
Hi Warrend
A cylinder with a diameter of 1 meter and with a length of 1 meter means
a displacement of 0,805 ts in saltwater..
A diameter of 2 meter with a length of 1 meter means
a displacement of 3,22 ts in saltwater..
Each person needs about 1 meter length - so a double seater needs
2 meters between the endcaps.. = 6,44 ts the overall sub will be
more in the area of 8-9 ts.. keep most homebuilders off..
I think 0,9 - 1 meter diameter - or the weight will be a
problem for the most cars and even pickups.
I put a picture of a bolted frame and a explain
how to make it to :
http://www.prismnet.com/~moki/subfiles
or direct:
http://www.prismnet.com/~moki/20030115.120916/113-1333a.JPG
and here :
http://www.prismnet.com/~moki/20030115.120916/113-1333a.desc
Bolted midgets:
Seahorse, all X-crafts, Aluminaut, all japanese midget, Seehund,
some italian modern midget - technical no problem, just a price issue..
regards Carsten
Warrend Greenway schrieb:
>
> The issue of beam seems to be causing a lot of concern. I want to
> be able to sit upright in the hull. I'm not interested in crouching
> or being balled-up in any way. Furthermore, 1.5-2.5 meters was the
> unanimous response. It would seem, however, that there are a lot of
> second thoughts on this. I am going to try laying out some stuff in
> my living room to get a better idea of scale. I think this is the
> first order of buisiness at this time. Please, all, make a mock up
> with sticks, cardboard, or whatever, and get a solid understanding of
> a realistic size. It is starting to sound like the 1.5 meters may have
> been closer to the target. Remember, though, that the modularity will
> allow the basic sub to be quite short, eliminating some cost/weight
> concerns.
>
> Warren.
>
> >
> > Any special tools that we need should be factored in
> > to the overall cost. This would include the method of
> > transporting it to and from the dive site. If 'we' are
> > planning to build a submarine of the size people are talking
> > about then you will probably need either a crane or strong
> > forklift truck for lifting parts and section into place.
> >
> > Although, it might be more econimical to get a vehicle
> > such as a flat bed truck with a built on crane:
> >
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6729&item=2400013033
> >
> > The specs being kicked around sounds more like the size of
> > a 4 to 6+ person sub, with room to stand up. I've got
> > say I would love to have a sub like that, but I'm not
> > sure how relistic it is to solve all the logistical problems
> > for constructing such a vessel by a private individual.
> > In fact I think hardly any one would beable to finance
> > and construct such a vessel, more so since this is intended
> > as a 'first submarine'. 1 meter is a more realistic hull
> > diameter... your second sub could be 2 meters....
> >
> > Ian.
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:08:05 +0800
> > "Warrend Greenway" <dub@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> >
> > > If this bolt together systems works out then Carsten's idea of
> > > uneven lengths becomes perfect. We would have around a 4 meter
> > > "main" section with the conning tower. Then you could either bolt
> > > on end-cap sections or extensions to the hull, either way you get
> > > exactly the length you want. It would be nice if towing behind an
> > > SUV wasn't a concern, but it is. I would get a Dodge and have
> > > 10,000lbs towing capacity, but that is not going to be a popular
> > > solution. "By a real truck for your PSUB!" Right.
> > >
> > > Warren.
> > >
> > > > The wish list looks like it's coming along well. I like the
"Required "
> > > > list especially, but I think the size is getting a little large for
> > > > something that will actually get built?
> > > >
> > > > Maybe one of the first things that should be considered is, are we
looking
> > > > to design a sub that can be trailered behind a standard sized SUV
or pickup
> > > > truck, or one that requires more to move it. Establish the
displacement
> > > > constraints rather then the details.
> > > >
> > > > Establishing a realistic budget may do well early on too. It's
probably the
> > > > main reason there aren't a flood of Psubs in the water already.
> > > > Keep in mind, every square center meter of volume adds to both cost
and
> > > > weight.
> > > >
> > > > My hat is off to Carstan for the project he has taken on, but
reality is, I
> > > > know he's way out of my league.
> > > >
> > > > Dan H.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Coalbunny" <coalbunny@vcn.com>
> > > > To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 7:40 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] OSS spec sheet
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I don't know what value this would be to the PSUB project, but
this is
> > > > > what I have so far-
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Length: "Around" 10 meters
> > > > > 2. Beam: 2-2.5 meters
> > > > > 3. Speed: unknown
> > > > > 4. Depth: 50 meters
> > > > > 5. Duration: 24 hours
> > > > > 6. Cost: unknown
> > > > > 7. Capacity: 3-4 passengers
> > > > > 8. Other: Optional electronics package
> > > > > Life support system
> > > > > Optional bow view port
> > > > > Optional fiberglass fairings
> > > > > Required analog/mechanical gauges
> > > > > Required auxillary electrical
> > > > > Required steel pressure hull
> > > > > Required drop ballast
> > > > > Required "trimable" ballast
> > > > > Required PWM speed control(?)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not really certain what the specs would be for speed.
> > > > > Carl
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > "You delight not in a city's seven or seventy wonders, but in an
answer
> > > > > it gives to a question of yours, or the question it asks you,
forcing
> > > > > you to answer, like Thebes through the mouth of the Sphinx." --
Kublai
> > > > > Khan
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > http://www.linuxmail.org/
> > > Now with POP3/IMAP access for only US$19.95/yr
> > >
> > > Powered by Outblaze
>
> --
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.linuxmail.org/
> Now with POP3/IMAP access for only US$19.95/yr
>
> Powered by Outblaze