|
Brent,
On the subject of large O-ring sealed
connections...
We have a diam 520 / 600 mm hatch on
Kraka. It has no leaks - no leaks at all surfaced as well as submerged. Its
designed for outside pressure only - but handles small inside over pressure
well.
Its made from two parts - a seat falme cut in 20 mm
steal plate, and welded to the top of the sail, and the hatch it self -
with the observation dome. Its also cut in 20 mm low carbon mild steal. None of
the parts have been machined prior to, or after welding. On the top part -
the hatch - we have welded two rings of 6
x 6 mm solid square steal bar. The welding is only done in part - like 30
mm weld then 60 mm no weld and so on. These two rings are concentric
and hold the 10 mm O - ring in position. Again none of all this has ever been
machined - its just grinded a little then painted. The design will
seal even better at deep water - since the o - ring
is compressed with pressure - and ultimately it will sit on the steal. I might
recommend 8 x 8 steal bar for a 10 mm o-ring for deep water not to crush the
o-ring.
In short - this simple technique can be applied to
much larger flanges and is not limited by the size of machines ( e.g.
lathes ) available.
Regards,
Peter
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 12:46
AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] S101
Greetings Carsten,
I've been meaning to ask you and Peter about
your bolted flange assembly for the machinery compartment. I know you have to
machine a O-ring groove in, but did you have to machine the mating
surfaces of the two flanges before and/or after welding them to the outer hull
steel? If so how did you machine flat that large of a surface,
as well as the O-ring groove? Did stitch welding significantly help in
preventing heat from warping the metal? Would clamping the first
flange to be welded onto a much thicker flat steel plate before
welding solve the warping problem? Then clamp and or bolt the second unwelded
flange to the welded flange, and then weld it? What
thickness and type of steel did you use? I've seen were on smaller flanges,
builders used stainless steel to take care of the rust issues. I'm not sure if
they used 304, 316 or some other type of stainless steel. I know that's a more
expensive way to go, but would you guys consider it as a good option if
the funds were not a big issue?
I've been looking for a practical way to do
this type of machining on large surfaces. For the O-ring grove I was thinking
of using a drill/mill and spin the flange through the cutting head
horizontally using a jig the can hold the flange and revolve at it's center
point. The Alicia sub also had this type of flange except it was bolted on the
outside, and used fiberglass fairing's to cover it.
Peter it looks like you used a
much thicker O-ring on your flange for Kraka then Carsten. Will
a thicker O-ring give you a larger margin of err in not having the flange
mating surfaces perfect? It did in are hyperbaric chamber door.
Does a thicker O-ring have a lower depth rating? Most of the
subs I've seen used a thin O-ring for some reason. Would you guys think having
a double O-ring design be a good idea to back-up the first O-ring if it failed
for some reason? What is the diameter of your O-rings, and how wide and
deep is the the O-ring groove before and after painting? Is there a formula
for the thickness diameter of the O-ring compared to the width and
depth of the O-ring groove and pressure rating?
I'm working on a design for a 85' plus live
aboard trimaran submarine with a main pressure hull diameter of 11'. I'm
currently looking at using at least three large unbolt able flanges so I can
build the sub inland and then truck it to the water, as well as for
maintenance issues.
Carsten I'm interesting in your type and
placement of moving trim weight(s). I've looked through the pics and drawings
I have of the Euronaut, and perhaps I'm blind but I don't see it. Is it
the batteries under the center walkway?
Kindest Regards,
Brent Hartwig
From: MerlinSub@t-online.de
Reply-To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Subject: Re:
[PSUBS-MAILIST] S101
Date: 28 Jun 2007 19:36
GMT
>
>S 101 has also some influence on the
Euronaut.
>Including the moving weight and the bolted machinery
compartment..
>
>Regards Carsten
>
>"James Huffman"
<grandadmiraldonitz@yahoo.com> schrieb:
> > Loving the
S101. Also love the Foxtrot, Typhoon, Type 212A.
>
>
> > James
> >
> >
> >
Peter Madsen <peter@submarines.dk> wrote:
>
> Hi
Psubbers,
> >
> >
> > Just before
design work started on our Kraka - we had a swedish visitor - he was an ex
S101 crew member and had worked for yours with swedish submarines. The
direct result of this visit was the construction of Kraka based on the
design of S101 but "amatuerised"
> >
> > What
does Psubers think of the S101 - is it a dreamboat og too big and bulky ( if
so - kraka comes out worse )
> >
> > Personaly
i am surprised to se the resembelance...and very small size of this
essentially professionel submarine.
> >
> >
Regards,
> >
> > Peter
> >
>
>
> > ---------------------------------
> >
Jeg beskyttes af den gratis SPAMfighter til privatbrugere.
> > Den
har indtil videre sparet mig for at få 17294 spam-mails
> >
Betalende brugere får ikke denne besked i deres e-mails.
> > Hent
en gratis SPAMfighter her.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>************************************************************************
>************************************************************************
>************************************************************************
>The
personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US
Federal
>CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears
in our database
>because either you, or someone you know, requested
you receive messages
>from our organization.
>
>If you
want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the
>link
below or send a blank email message to:
>
removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
>
>Removal of your
email address from this mailing list occurs by an
>automated process
and should be complete within five minutes of
>our server receiving
your request.
>
>PSUBS.ORG
>PO Box 53
>Weare,
NH 03281
>603-529-1100
>************************************************************************
>************************************************************************
>************************************************************************
>
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************ The
personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal CAN-SPAM Act
of 2003. Your email address appears in our database because either you, or
someone you know, requested you receive messages from our organization. If you
want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the link below or
send a blank email message to: removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an automated
process and should be complete within five minutes of our server receiving
your request. PSUBS.ORG PO Box 53 Weare, NH 03281 603-529-1100
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
Jeg beskyttes af den gratis SPAMfighter til privatbrugere.
Den har indtil videre sparet mig for at få 17332 spam-mails
Betalende brugere får ikke denne besked i deres e-mails.
Hent en gratis SPAMfighter her.
|