[PSUBS-MAILIST] G.L. Submersible Classification

[brian]

When these agencies review a new sub do they evaluate how all the components interact in an overall comprehensive way?  What if a sub has some type of out of the ordinary feature or new type of material used?  Is it up to the manufacturer to prove the case for the new component?  Would they require additional testing on such a component or would engineering calcs suffice ?  What if you had a mechanical arm, but it didn't really work very good, is that something they would be concerned about?
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: "Phil Nuytten" <phil at philnuytten.com>
Sent 11/18/2013 8:42:20 PM
To: "Personal Submersibles General Discussion" <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] G.L. Submersible ClassificationAll:Nuytco has had experience classing with most of the majors – Lloyds
Register, Germanischer Lloyds, American Bureau of Shipping,  Det Norske
Veritas (now combined with GL) and Cayman Islands register of Shipping. All of
these classifying agencies use as their reference “Pressure Vessels for Human
Occupancy – section 8”, commonly referred to as ‘PVHO8’. Several of these
agencies have additional requirements but in the main they stick to PVHO8. The
choice of who you go with is usually governed by: basic prices for initial ‘Plan
Approval’ and hourly rates for witnessing tests, materials, etc., the proximity
of the surveyors to your place of build (since you have to cover all costs of
the surveyor if they are not in your area) and finally, the location of the
office who will make the final decision relative to your subs
classification  -relative to where their local representatives offices are
located. The good news is that almost all of these agencies accept each others
witnessing and certs. Be prepared, though, it is expensive to class – particularly if you are
only building one sub. In the case of a manufacturer like Nuytco, we can spread
our costs over a number of subs by getting ‘type approval’ so much of the
initial stuff does not have to redone with each sub, as long as you don’t change
the design.Phil From:Alan JamesSent: Monday, November 25, 2013 7:52 PMTo:Personal Submersibles General
DiscussionSubject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] G.L. Submersible
Classification Hi Jon,I
have very little idea as to what requirements there are in both,other
than what I've heard over the years on this site & snippets
elsewhere.They
could be very close, I don't know.I intend to read through ABS as well but
for some reason I've started on G.L..I
doubt there will be an issue of competition here as I can't see too many
Psubbers wanting
to spend the money to certify. However from a safety standpoint there
maybe
some interest. And either group would be a good guideline for this.I
could start with ABS, but members may be more familiar with them than G.L.,
&able
to comment on discrepancies. I
think Jim & David were interested in following classification
guidelines.How
far are you two down the track with this? And would it be preferred if we
wentover
ABS instead???Regards
Alan From: Jon
Wallace <jonw at psubs.org>To: Personal Submersibles General
Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 3:37
PMSubject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST]
G.L. Submersible Classification 
I don't have any issues
with it as long as the discussion remains objective.  I have been reminded
that we have a working relationship with ABS that we've worked hard to build up
over the years and don't want to jeopardize.  However, we would certainly
entertain and approve of a working relationship with GL as well, and any others
that might want a working relationship with PSUBS.  I would also note that
we do have links to GL on our website right now at WWW.PSUBS.ORG -> Resources &
Reference -> Guidelines & Standards -> Germanischer Lloyd AG
(hopefully still current).
I've never personally
looked at certification as "us vs them".  Kittredge used both ABS and
Lloyd's, as has Nuytco I believe.  In fact, Kittredge also used Nippon
once.  I believe the choice usually comes down to financials rather than
one set of rules being better than another.
If you
think there's a propensity for the discussion to get critical of a particular
certifying authority let's have it on the member-only list instead of the public
list.
Jon
On 11/25/2013 6:33 PM, Alan James wrote:Hi,I've
just started going through the Germanic LLoyds rules for classificationof
manned submersibles, with view to building as close as possible to them.http://www.gl-group.com/pdf/
GL_Rules_MannedSubmersibles. pdfIs
anyone interested in me summarizing the rules as I go along?There
are a few people in the group with GL classification experience whomay
want to chip in & keep an eye on what I'm saying in case my
understandingis
not quite right. Also any variations from ABS that people pick up onwould
be interesting to know.I am hopeful this will generate discussion in some
areas.Jon if you don't like this idea email meAlan_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.orghttp://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles _______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing listPersonal_Submersibles at psubs.orghttp://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing
list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20131126/600d702f/attachment-0001.html>