|
Bill, Paul,
I don't think microwaves are used in underwater
communication, but I'm not positive. For local communicating acoustic
equipment is used. It is like radio communication but instead of
an electrical radio frequency carrier, it uses a high frequency sound wave
carrier. Mechanical not electrical, or sound wave not electrical
wave,
For a deep water test, if I ever had to do another,
I'd use a line for safety and to control decent, but also a simple two wire
cable connected to a magnetic drop weight system. Something
simple, controlled with a dry cell in a plastic bag or something as simple as
that. No need to get fancy but a magnetic release with actual
wires to the surface would be best.
In large subs they do usually test manned since a
leak, or anything that is fixable, is dealt with as the test is in
progress. Also I remember reading somewhere that strain gauges are placed
in critical parts on the hull to monitor its performance. These need to be
tended to and monitored. They just pilot it down and watch to see what is
happening.
Dan H.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 4:39
PM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re:
[PSUBS-MAILIST] hull test
Boy I like Bill's idea of remote control of a few key
systems. Why not attach an umbilical for ballast control, leak detectors
and maybe an internal camera? One downside of a wire would be coming up
with the 300-1000 feet of cable needed. But you'd have, in effect, a
super-size ROV with optional human cargo. ;-)
Paul
On 10/26/05, Akins
<lakins1@tampabay.rr.com>
wrote:
Your below post got me to wondering
Dan.
Since we use microwave transmissions for
underwater communications, why couldn't microwave transmissions
be used to activate a remote control in a sub
the size of Carsten's so that a test line would only be there for
making
sure the sub did not drift away and for a
secondary backup. Would the microwave transmissions go thru the hull
and
the remote could be rigged to activate the
ballast pumps so the sub could surface after
the test depth and time were reached?
Would this be feasible or
practical?
Bill.
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:12 AM
Subject:
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hull test
Silky,
A sub hull is a lot of
money and work to loose if you lower it to the bottom
for a test on a
line, with no person in it, but it's the safest way to test
a personal
sub. Of course testing in a pressure chamber would be even
better but most small sub builders don't have or can't afford this
luxury.
Even with the risk of loosing the sub because of a simple line
malfunction,
a deep water test of the hull should be done
unmanned. After all, it's a
test to see if you'll be safe diving
in it.
A sub the size of Carsten's is not in this category. I
can only imagine the
feeling in Carstan's gut when he does his tests,
manning it himself. I have
a lot of faith is the calculating
skills of a man that can design and build
such a project and I'm sure
he's pretty confident he will have no problems
he can't solve as he
goes, but we all know there is considerable risk
involved.
P-subs should only be test proven unmanned!
Dan
H.
----- Original Message -----
|