- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Titanic tourist submarine goes missing
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:23 pm to DakIsNoLB
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:23 pm to DakIsNoLB
quote:
Carbon fiber may very well be viable, but possibly not in the composition they designed. We don't know what caused the failure here, and we can't correlate past successful dives with their carbon fiber being a viable material. My concern was merely they didn't do any kind of testing to determine if stress reversals due to pressure changes had adverse effects on the integrity of the material.
Question: since it is a composite material, is it possible that it would be difficult to determine a stable lifespan based on dive depth cycles? Could it react/be damaged just a bot differently on each dive so say one vessel would have an X amount of dives before it becomes unsafe, but a twin vessel might only have y dives? Just wondering if that is a thing? Because if it is, I can understand why it is not considered a viable material; you would never really know how many use cycles you could get under a reasonable safety net.
2
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:24 pm to Wishnitwas1998
quote:
Some are saying it's not possible to test the materials it was made out of properly.
I have no idea if that's true or not
The only source I have seen claiming this is the OceanGate people themselves. Back when their chief engineer was fired, this was a claim they made to him. I've fabricated things out of carbon fiber but have never had anything critical enough to require that kind of testing so I am not sure what is possible.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:24 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
This catastrophe is how. Are you retarded?
May not have been the materials, could be some design flaw that exacerbated it.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:25 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
May not have been the materials, could be some design flaw that exacerbated it.
Material selection was a giant design flaw, so I guess technically you aren't wrong.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:26 pm to Wishnitwas1998
quote:
Some are saying it's not possible to test the materials it was made out of properly. I have no idea if that's true or not
There is equipment that can simulate the pressures, to test the equipment before it’s deployed
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:27 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
Another article says she's been estranged from her family for several years so I don't know how much stock to put in what she says
To be honest I'm trying to not think about that if true.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:31 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
Again, if the reports that this sub made at least a dozen dives to that depth with everyone making it back fine, how can anyone say the composite material wasn't a viable material? They literally have real world proof that it was.
Yea. It’s on the bottom of the ocean in pieces. After a catastrophic failure. When other people warned them it can happen.
Not ALL Ford Pintos that were rear ended caught on fire, trapped the occupants, and incinerated them alive. Just some. Why was that considered a bad design?
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:32 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:yea i just find it funny when people say stuff like this.... ITS ONLY CERTIFIED FOR XXX......well that certification usually means it can do 2x-5x of that amount.
but with a FOS of 3, amirite?
That's nothing for an elevator design, and isn't a sub basically a big ocean elevator?
Posted on 6/23/23 at 2:39 pm to waiting4saturday
quote:
The company that made the window only rated it for 1,300m
I once repped a manufacturer of an oilfield atmospheric vessel (NOT A PRESSURE VESSEL) that was not rated, tested to 50 PSI and failed at slightly over 100 (IIRC). Still paid policy limits for the 4 fatalities (along with about a dozen other defendants) for what I thought was exemplary performance. I maintain this was user error (and they paid the ultimate price of course), but whatever the pressure capacity of the vessel was, they were hell-bent on exceeding it.
This post was edited on 6/23/23 at 2:41 pm
Posted on 6/23/23 at 3:13 pm to PassingThrough
Holy shite. The titanium end cap were bolted to a titanium flange that was GLUED to the carbon fiber hull.
YouTube
YouTube
Posted on 6/23/23 at 3:17 pm to lsuguy84
quote:
There is equipment that can simulate the pressures, to test the equipment before it’s deployed
Yes but with a 2 part material you're always at the mercy of a void. Maybe it's caused by the testing, maybe on the next dive. It's not like steel or welds where radiography can be performed.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 3:52 pm to Smeg
The glue was probably a waterproofing. Screws probably held it in place
Posted on 6/23/23 at 4:39 pm to GeauxZone90
quote:
The glue was probably a waterproofing. Screws probably held it in place
Screws? For a vessel that dives 2+ miles into the ocean?
Posted on 6/23/23 at 4:44 pm to GeauxZone90
No it was glued, there's a video of it being built
Posted on 6/23/23 at 4:49 pm to Saintsisit
When are they going to send another sub down? If at first you don’t succeed, try try again.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 4:59 pm to GeauxZone90
quote:
The glue was probably a waterproofing.
Coimpletely wrong. The only thing attaching the titanium ring to the carbon fiber tube was glue. The bolts attached the end plate to the titanium ring which again, was glued on.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 5:25 pm to sledgehammer
quote:
When are they going to send another sub down? If at first you don’t succeed, try try again.
James Cameron has been down there 30+ times.
Posted on 6/23/23 at 5:37 pm to Globetrotter747
Man... all that's coming out now about this. I know hindsight is always 20/20 but how could anyone think getting aboard the vehicle was a good idea?
Posted on 6/23/23 at 5:39 pm to jdd48
quote:
Man... all that's coming out now about this. I know hindsight is always 20/20 but how could anyone think getting aboard the vehicle was a good idea?
Didn’t the same thing do it multiple times before?
Posted on 6/23/23 at 5:41 pm to TackySweater
quote:
Didn’t the same thing do it multiple times before?
Yea, but questions were raised about safety since the first trials even according to James Cameron.
Page 84 of 92
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News