Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings

["Brian Cox" <ojaibees@ojai.net>]

Oh... and what thickness would be appropriate for an overlay?  Thanks!

Brian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adam Lawrence" <adteleka@in-tch.com>
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings


> Weld a stainless overlay on both surfaces and then machine them.
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dan H." <jmachine@adelphia.net>
> To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 6:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings
> 
> 
> > Brian,
> >
> > Your hatch cover being stainless isn't as important as the hatch ring it
> > mates to.  Your most likely going to be placing your O-ring groove in the
> > hatch cover and it will stay there.  You can make that part out of carbon
> > steel and paint it.  True, stainless would be better, but as you mentioned
> > it's pricey.  Your $156 dollar ring would be over $400 in stainless.
> >
> > The mating ring, conning tower top, is much better in stainless since it's
> > what your going to be stepping on and dragging things in and out over.
> > Paint will get scratched there and cause you problems.  Also the O-ring
> has
> > to make a good seal on it every time you close the hatch.
> >
> > If your watching you budget, stay with the carbon steel ring you have
> > already ordered but do order a stainless ring for the top of your conning
> > tower.  One note, when machining the O-ring groove don't forget to allow a
> > few thousants on each surface for paint build up.
> >
> > Dan H.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brian Cox" <ojaibees@ojai.net>
> > To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 12:34 AM
> > Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings
> >
> >
> > > I think I may have made an error when designing this hatch.  My plan was
> > to build just the hatch and then seal off the bottom part and then take
> off
> > our coast here and drop it down to about 1200' or( 365 meters) to see if
> it
> > would hold together.  I'm mainly curious about the acrylic dounut.
> > Origionally I was thinking that the whole assembly would be the hatch but
> > upon further thought that seemed like it would be too heavy to handle so I
> > decided to split the hatch above the acrylic dounut so just the top steel
> > hemisphere would open.  This is the drawing I posted a while back
> > http://www.prismnet.com/~moki/20040309.103505/hatchXdrawing.jpg  .  The
> > bummer part is that I just ordered a ring 24" OD by 20" ID and .75 thick
> > A516 - 70  which I was planning to weld onto the 20" (508mm) hemisphere.
> > Since when that ring gets welded onto the hemisphere there is going to be
> a
> > lot of warping of the ring and it will have to be machined flat so it
> seems
> > like you would need enough metal so!
> > >   that once you're done machining it is still thick enough to be strong.
> > If I had to use stainless steel for that ring I bet that would be really
> > expensive.  The 24" od  by  20" id  by .75" thick is going to run me
> $156.00
> > would it be possible to weld a piece of 1/4" stainless onto the thicker
> > piece or would you still have the problem of warping ?
> > >
> > > Brian
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Carsten Standfuss" <MerlinSub@t-online.de>
> > > To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 2:06 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings
> > >
> > >
> > > > I would say: Yes.
> > > >
> > > > In the year 2004 hatches rings and troughull connetors should be made
> > > > from stainless steel. Corrosion on this parts can be really expensive
> > > > over the years. Maintance time is also an issue.
> > > >
> > > > regards Carsten
> > > >
> > > > > Brian Cox schrieb:
> > > > >
> > > > > Do the hatch rings need to be stainless
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
>