[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Alternative hull material
If
anybody wants a real idea of what composites can do, go to the Deepflight web
page and take a look at the Aviator.
As I
am building my vehicle I will try to keep everybody updated on the tests that I
am doing. I will also be asking for people to act very negative (devil's
advocate), so as to make sure if there is any aspect of testing that I might
have forgotten.
The
main reason for the composites, is to get the vehicle the way I want it. I
want a sub that is not only good looking but efficient, and I don't see that
with traditionally shaped hulls and super structures. I could be
completely off base, we will see.
It is
going to be quite a while before I start building. I am still in the
research stage.
Thanks
for your ear.
Tim
R.
Michael (2x),
I considered building a sub out of GRP
(glass-polyesther). This is easier to handle than kevlar-epoxy and a lot
cheaper. I changed my mind because both materials have unknown specs. The
strenght depends on a lot of factors such as the know-how of the
builder, the quality of the resin, the way different types of cloth
are used and so on. It can be done of course, the LR5 is a good example.
But for an amateur like me i thouhgt it would be far more simple and cheaper
to use steel. When you use steel you can simply have a
look in the books and find out how to make the details such as
though-hulls, viewports and so on.
Another problem is formed by the unknown decline
of the material as a result of water pentrated in the laminate. This means
that you can do an unmanned pressure test but you will never know in what
condition it is after a view years. If you use A516 you can be sure that
after a hundred years it's still the same A516 steel.
Thijs
Struijs