I'm confused, haha. So on a K-350, the operating depth is 350 feet and the test depth would be 437.5 feet (multiplied by 1.25) and the failure depth would be 600 feet? I'm just trying to understand the thread of posts.
-Scott Waters
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Design depth
From: vbra676539@aol.com
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:01:27 -0500
Phil,
How close are those numbers to the ABS specs of the 70s? I think HBOI did an FEA study on their PC-1204 and reckoned the ABS certification for 1000 feet (and, one supposes, the test and crush depths, as well) were marginal. Strong enough, but nothing to spare. Twice the working depth would be 2000 feet for a PC-12 and I think they were a half inch thick with 2" leg out ring stiffeners on something like 16" centers. HBOI did go through the recert process and accepted the 1000 foot capability, but someone up there was not altogether thrilled with the numbers. Maybe it was that 28" conning tower reinforcement. I don't know. Mind you, the 12s are possible the most successful series ever built, considering the jillion or so dives they have racked up, and continue to rack up. Nervous or not, the Perrys still perform. I'd take one to 1000 right this minute without a qualm. Been there, done that.
Vance
-----Original Message----- From: Phil Nuytten <phil@philnuytten.com> To: personal_submersibles <personal_submersibles@psubs.org> Sent: Fri, Dec 10, 2010 2:23 pm Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Design depth
All:
We class with lloyds,Germanischer Lloyd and ABS. The only difference in design depth/hull test,etc., that I'm aware of, Is the test depth versus rated depth (or 'working depth') Lloyds Surveyors, for example' is that physical test depth must be 1.4. rated depth - G.L.is 1.5 and so on. Design collapse in all these agencies is 2 times rated or working depth - or,100 percent safety factor. For clarity, the Deepworkers are 2000 foot rated or working depth, 2800 foot test depth and design collapse (as shown by calculation and FEA's) meets or exceeds 4000 feet. Seems pretty easy to me!
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
You guys have fallen head over heels in love with a logic trap, heavily basted with semantics. Give it up. Design depth is your operating depth PLUS the percentage required for testing. It means the depth to which the pressure vessel may be taken repeatedly without incurring irrecoverable damage.
125% doesn't make some people happy. I'll just stick in my 2 cents and tell you that I have done a whole bunch of dives in vehicles built and tested to that standard. Crush depth is an arbitrary derivative of the overall calculations, suggesting that all things being perfect, if you go this deep (whatever THIS happens to be) then the hull MAY suffer irreparable damage, and if it does, then THIS is the site of most probable damage. The THIS is typically a measure of the weakest link in the design, which is specific to the design, not general discussion. It is NOT a weak link, but simply the first failure point.
A C-class Perry for instance would be rated for 1200 feet maximum operating depth. It's design depth (and unmanned test depth) would be 1500 feet and it's crush test.....hmmm, I forget. About 1800 and change, I think. Maybe 19 and change. That kind of thing is in the initial ABS calculation package, if you happen to have it. However, it is not normally in the general ABS certs. I do not have a crush depth number for Gamma, for instance, but do have her certifications.
For general interest, Nekton Alpha, Beta and Gamma are all rated at 1000 feet and were all tank tested to 1500. Crush depth was ascertained by model testing, which verified the calculations handily (just over 2000 feet). Perry was doing repetitive construction on two proven primary designs (tubular hull, internal or external ring stiffeners). Once proven, in other words, all they had to do was replicate and prove that they had done so.
As to accepting one safety factor over another, I'd say 125% should be the accepted norm, based on experience and history. Anything over that is a personal choice. I feel one way, somebody else feels another. Potato, potahto.
Shallow boats are easy to double up on. The old Submaray, for instance, was 3/8" plate and they held it to 300 feet for safety. The PC-8, on the other hand, was also 3/8" plate and I can't even tell you how many times I've been to her operating maximum of 800 feet. Different construction techniques. Different design. Different results.
Vance
-----Original Message----- From: Jon Wallace < jonw@psubs.org> To: personal_submersibles < personal_submersibles@psubs.org> Sent: Fri, Dec 10, 2010 4:53 am Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Design depth
Jim, Design depth is derived from the parameters (material type, hull thickness, number of ribs, spacing of ribs, etc) used in ABS/ASME formulas to determine the maximum external pressure that the submarine can operate in. I don't think ABS or anyone else can reliably calculate "fail depth" or "crush depth" because those depths are highly dependent upon quality of material, fabrication, vessel use/maintenance, etc. The crush depth could be some percentage above or below design depth, however you could only find out definitively by testing the vessel to destruction. For that reason, you don't want to perform a manned dive to 375 feet. Make sure that is an unmanned test. You'll note that ABS Underwater Vessels Section 3.5 limits the manned test dive to the design depth. Jon On 12/10/2010 9:04 AM, JimToddPsub@aol.com wrote:
Jon,
I need to read and study the whole ABS publication thoroughly, but from what I've read is seems that the Design Depth I would need to claim would be 300 feet. During the survey I would need to dive in increments to 375 feet (300 x 1.25). The vessel would then be rated to 300 feet. Per ABS, Design Depth is the depth to which the vessel is "designed and approved to operate." It's going to be approved to 300. If I want to have it approved for anything more than that, I'll have to have it surveyed to 125% of whatever I want its operating depth to be.
What is surprising is that [so far] I see nothing in ABS that specifies how the Design Depth must be derived. It seems rather arbitrary rather than stating something such as "60% of the calculated fail depth."
Jim
In a message dated 12/10/2010 1:24:29 A.M. Central Standard Time, jonw@psubs.org writes: A different approach is to say, I know I don't want to dive deeper than 300 feet (my max operating depth) and I want a 2x safety margin. That means using material capable of withstanding 600 feet depth. Now with this approach you certainly may not pass a 1.25 overpressure test for a 600 foot design depth, however you've already self imposed a 2x safety margin. If you wanted ABS certification, then you simply claim the design depth as 480 feet. Now you meet the ABS requirement (480 x 1.25 = 600) and also are still well within your 300 foot self-imposed depth limit.
|