[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] acrylic viewport thickness



Hi Rick,

 

Yes, the whole idea of the 120 degree design was to minimize thinning. The operating depth of the boat is 1,750’ with ABS safety factors. It hasn’t been tested, because it hasn’t been finished, but I’m planning to just lower it unmanned, hopefully on a trip to Roatan which has a very deep drop-off close to shore. I’m caught doing a refit of my other sub first, but should be back on Solo in a few months. The cost of the dome was $1,400. Please note my dome is way smaller than what you are looking for. Mine is only 28” in diameter. Sorry for the telegram style writing, I’ve got to run!

 

Great add Phil, thanks!


Alec

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick and Marcia [mailto:empiricus@telus.net]
Sent:
Monday, February 21, 2005 5:27 PM
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] acrylic viewport thickness

 

Alec - thanks for the quick reply. 

 

I take it, then, that the 120 degrees results in substantially less thinning at the apex?

 

What's the operating depth of your boat?  How did you test it?  Cost?

 

Those thicknesses you gave me are a great starting point.  Thanks.

 

Rick Lucertini

----- Original Message -----

From: Alec Smyth

Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 1:01 PM

Subject: RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] acrylic viewport thickness

 

Rick,

 

I’d really recommend you get yourself a copy of the PVHO. It’s a little pricey, but one of the most valuable texts out there in terms of the usefulness of the information. What you’ll find is formulas and guidelines of a very practical nature for calculating just this sort of problem.

 

There are two basic fabrication techniques for domes; you can cast them in a mold, or blow them with compressed air. Casting is the method on all the certified subs you mentioned, but a cast dome costs tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. For PSUBS, you’re probably looking at blown domes. A sheet of acrylic is fastened by a ring to a flat surface. The assembly is heated, and compressed air injected to form the dome. There’s more to it than that, but that’s the basic approach.

 

One of the challenges of blown domes is that the material has to stretch out, and can get quite thin at the apex. It’s the minimum thickness that counts when it comes to the stress formulae. So a trick you might want to use is to blow a dome of fewer than 180 degrees. In my case, I went with 120 degrees. It still looks and feels almost like 180, but there’s a very considerable advantage in thickness and hence strength. My window is made of 2” material, and at the apex it is 1.73” thick.

 

Cheers,


Alec

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick and Marcia [mailto:empiricus@telus.net]
Sent:
Monday, February 21, 2005 3:33 PM
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] acrylic viewport thickness

 

Hi, All - regarding the acrylic viewports . . . does anyone know how thick the viewports are/were on the dome type of subs like Hikino, Deep Flyer, PC-8, Deep Rover, etc.  (Makakai was constructed of sectional pieces glued together - beyond my skills)

 

I'm interested in a 6ft. diameter hemisphere to be used to 3 atm's (30 metres) max operating depth.  One-atm cockpit.

 

I originally considered using the half-dome for an ambient-dry boat but, since 3 atm's is so shallow, I may be able to afford a one-atm viewport.  I have family that I don't want to subject to barotrauma.  They're all pre-teen and still growing.

 

Separate issue: Anyone with a knowledge of metal may be able to suggest framework for this half-dome.  I'm considering using 3 inch square tubing.  Underkill?  Overkill?

 

If it comes down to it, I'll just order a one inch (at the apex) half-dome and use the boat ambiently.

 

Rick Lucertini

Vancouver, Canada