Hey, Paul - yeah, any camcorder you would otherwise
have used for a hammer throw. And if you successfully achieve crush depth
with the hull, the camera would be moot - throwing a bunch of oil filled bath
beads into the hull may be a good idea, too. Hopefully they'd float to the
surface to let you know you need a new hull!
Rick
Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 12:43
PM
Subject: Re: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hull
test
Rick, there you go, some good practical methods. Put a
plain old camcorder onboard. My idea with a video cable running to the
surface was way too complicated. And pessimistic. You want to
believe that you'll get the camera, and sub, back fairly dry.
Come to
think of it, I have a JVC miniDV camera that I would love to consign to a deep
watery grave... Or use in an ROV and not worry about
flooding.
Paul Sub-Log.com Seattle, WA
On 10/27/05, Alec
Smyth <Alec.Smyth@compuware.com>
wrote:
If I recall correctly,
Piccard tested his bathyscaphe by sending it down unmanned with a
simple clock mechanism to release ballast. In that case, it was done
untethered in the open ocean and the sub had virtually no depth limit,
but I can see doing a test like that with Euronaut if you first tethered a
line between an anchor and a buoy, and sent the sub up and down that so as
to have more control over where it surfaced at the end of the test.
Alec
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 -----
|