|
Forget cable$. Dip it using standard
cable/drum.
[1] Secure a video cam [used] on wide angle. Illuminate the
inside!
[2] Install a $5 leak detector [with a light
or buzzer] at the keel in view of the camera.
[3] Install a light, tight wire,
graduated with surveyor's tape at intervals, from one side of the hull to the
other - use a turnbuckle - across the view of the camera.
[4] Make sure the time in the viewscreen
matches your watch.
[5] Teabag it - run the camera
first!
[6] Retrieve the test hull
[7] Log the depth/time per "event": In other
words, watch the video afterwards and listen for hull sounds and
watch the surveyor's tapes. Does the wire arc downwards (is the hull
interior being compressed?) and by how much? Log the sounds/leaks,
etc.
REPEAT
Note: Will not work at crush depth . . .
(huh?)
Build a dry ambient ;-)
Rick
Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 1:39
PM
Subject: 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 -----
|