[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings
What I was referring to was were the stainless plate lays on top of the carbon steel plate. I'm sure there is really no issue here. It's just that where the stainless lays on top of the carbon steel it is just covering the carbon steel and not actually welded in-between that space, but since it is completely sealed by welds no seawater could get in there .
welds> 0------------------------0<welds -- stainless plate
0------------------------0 --carbon steel plate
edges are welded ^ ^ edge weld
I'm probably making this way more difficult than it needs to be. Thanks for your patience.
Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Lawrence" <adteleka@in-tch.com>
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings
> Whatever isn't stainless, paint. I'm not sure what you are saying.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Cox" <ojaibees@ojai.net>
> To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 8:53 AM
> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hatch rings
>
>
> > If I did do a stainless overlay on one of the sides, or maybe both , would
> it only be welded on the edges? If so, would that non welded area between
> the stainless and the carbon steel cause any problems?
> >
> > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>