<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title>E-Mail Software 6.0</title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" link="#000000" vlink="#000000" alink="#000080"
topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginwidth="0" marginheight="0"><font
face="Courier New" size=2>GL says 1,2 from work to test depth (for
work depth over 300 m). <BR> And 1,73 from work to
destroy depth
(for depth over 600 m.)<BR>It says 2,0 from work to destroy depth
if the
water depth in the dive area is deeper than the work
depth. </font>
<BR><BR>So question number one: is
the bottom in the dive area deeper than 1000 M ? Yes SF = 2,0 No : SF
1,73<BR><BR>I think 1,25 ABS is from work to test depth not to destroy
depth ?
<BR><BR>A large dome for 1000 its a issue himself. <BR><BR>vbr
Carsten<BR>
<BR>"Sean T. Stevenson" <cast55@telus.net> schrieb:
<blockquote style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014-04-08 07:01, swaters
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite=mid:l1f3gd16j59fwyyy168bs1eu.1396961848508@email.android.com
type="cite">
<div>Is there any pictures of Karls boat? I appriciate the idea
about the sphears Joe. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What is a good safety rating on a 1000m sub in terms of
design crush depth or rated vs crush ratio? </div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Scott Waters</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Bare ABS rules give you 1.25 over predicted failure. 1.5 - 2.0
is
common in actual practice. For a 1000m hull a 2.0 SF would
necessitate a lot of extraneous material. Perhaps take the
service
conditions into account? (i.e. will 1000m dives will be typical or
exceptional?).<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<font face="Courier New" size=2> </font></body>
</html>