Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Seems a reasonable conclusion. The primary hull was a thick carbon fiber tube, and while carbon fiber is a very strong material in tension, it's not great under compression. Really makes me wonder who thought this would be a good idea.The conclusion seems to be that everytime the sub experienced the extreme pressures of going so deep, its structural integrity weakened. So it imploded because it had become too weak to withstand that much pressure.
The billionaire backing the project, Stockton Rush (who went down with his ship), said in one interview that he didn't hire only "50-year-old white guys" for the project. We don't know exactly what that entailed in terms of who he did hire or for what positions.I'm sorry, what? How does that even begin to make sense?
Unless people are only reading one headline a day, it's not more than a minute of distraction. This isn't the old newspaper days where there were only so many column inches that would be published, or even the old television news program days in which there would only be 22 minutes of news cast.While this is tragic, it does explain why there is so much hype, so what else is going on that we are being distracted from?
Maybe you can see the difference:I don't understand peoples obsession with the Titanic. There's an identical ocean liner called the Britannic which sank in 1916. By comparison hardly anyone pays attention to it or even knows about it.
Britannic was launched just before the start of the First World War. She was designed to be the safest of the three ships with design changes made during construction due to lessons learned from the sinking of the Titanic. She was laid up at her builders, Harland and Wolff, in Belfast for many months before being requisitioned as a hospital ship. In 1915 and 1916 she served between the United Kingdom and the Dardanelles. On the morning of 21 November 1916 she was shaken by an explosion caused by a naval mine of the Imperial German Navy near the Greek island of Kea and sank 55 minutes later, killing 30 people.
There were 1,066 people on board; the 1,036 survivors were rescued from the water and lifeboats. Britannic was the largest ship lost in the First World War
We are fed political news 24/7. A short break from that isn’t going to deter the news cycle returning to politics as soon as the excitement dies down from something else going on in the world. As we have seen with this story.While this is tragic, it does explain why there is so much hype, so what else is going on that we are being distracted from?
Indeed, we are fed lots of news, though sometime when some news isn't politically advantageous to someone, it can be to their advantage for a different story to get a lot of hype, so if a story is being overhyped, then it should be worth considering why that is happening and who gains from having the focus drawn off of other news.We are fed political news 24/7. A short break from that isn’t going to deter the news cycle returning to politics as soon as the excitement dies down from something else going on in the world. As we have seen with this story.
the media focus in on a story because they have a better grasp of what stories are popular than ever before, through seeing which stories get views, on the internet.Indeed, we are fed lots of news, though sometime when some news isn't politically advantageous to someone, it can be to their advantage for a different story to get a lot of hype, so if a story is being overhyped, then it should be worth considering why that is happening and who gains from having the focus drawn off of other news.
The epitome of a human interest story. Like the miners, how long till it’s made into a movie.the media focus in on a story because they have a better grasp of what stories are popular than ever before, through seeing which stories get views, on the internet.
No conspiracy needed. The titan submersible tragedy had all the elements to dominate the news cycle, similar to the chilean miners trapped in a mine, and the children stuck in a cave.
It is not a conspiracy, but rather it is naive to think that people don't have a vested interest in using the media to influence what we think.the media focus in on a story because they have a better grasp of what stories are popular than ever before, through seeing which stories get views, on the internet.
No conspiracy needed. The titan submersible tragedy had all the elements to dominate the news cycle, similar to the chilean miners trapped in a mine, and the children stuck in a cave.
The son did not want to go. He did it to please his father.
And just as well, they have a vested interest in making money.It is not a conspiracy, but rather it is naive to think that people don't have a vested interest in using the media to influence what we think.
Seems a reasonable conclusion. The primary hull was a thick carbon fiber tube, and while carbon fiber is a very strong material in tension, it's not great under compression. Really makes me wonder who thought this would be a good idea.
All good points, though the expert analysis I've seen from people experienced with submersible construction and carbon fiber, along with my own (admittedly limited) experience with carbon has pointed to the material choice as a major issue, especially coupled with the lack of any testing or certification. Other similar-ish designs (using the same construction) were only deemed safe for one or two dives to that sort of depth before there would be concerns about delamination.The polymer matrix often used in CFRP is very strong under compression though.
IMO, OceanGate's choice of material wasn't the problem but the choice to use tube-shaped pressure vessel instead of spherical shape as all other deep submergence vehicles are using. Although tube-shaped pressure vessels worked quite well for military nuclear submarines, military subs have much shallower max diving depth and watertight bulkheads dividing the pressure vessel into several compartments offer additional reinforcement against outside pressure.
The problem with using tube at such great depths is that it only takes a miniscule amount of deformation of the tube to cause massive differential in overall forces acting on the tube, triggering further deformation and even bigger differences in forces and rapid progression of failure of the material and the eventual implosion.
Such event can be triggered by an imploding camera or lights outside the vehicle. If I remember correctly, Rush decided to hardware-store grade cheapo security cameras outside the sub. If one of these cheapo cams imploded, the shockwave can cause enough deformation of the pressure vessel to eventually cause it to implode.
Any miniscule imperfection in manufacturing that can cause the tube shape to even be imperceptively off-circle in cross section will cause massive cyclic stresses from repeated dives with the massive differential in forces acting on the tube due to the manufacturing defect. Weakening the structure or even lead to undetectable cracks after just a few dives.
A sphere would have much greater resilience from such problems because the shape is reinforced equally in all three dimensions. However, it may be quite difficult or even impossible to fabricate a perfect pressure vessel using carbon fiber plastic. A lot easier (and cheaper) to do it with tube shape, but not sphere. A greater diameter spherical vessel made entirely of titanium as many other DSV's are using is guaranteed to work safely but is likely more expensive than to accommodate the same number of people in a tube using carbon fiber.
Many of OceanGate's decision to make their unorthodox DSV is to cut costs. Perhaps, they went way too far. Even the external cameras are cheap hardware variety...Note that if the cheapo camera imploded (because it's cheap....), the powerful shockwave from the camera's implosion, can trigger further implosions like the catastrophic implosion of the pressure vessel housing the human occupants.
Hard to believe OceanGate didn't know about the danger of imploding cameras / lights outside the vessel can implode with the force of an exploding grenade. Had they known about it, they wouldn't have cut costs with camera equipment.
All good points, though the expert analysis I've seen from people experienced with submersible construction and carbon fiber, along with my own (admittedly limited) experience with carbon has pointed to the material choice as a major issue, especially coupled with the lack of any testing or certification. Other similar-ish designs (using the same construction) were only deemed safe for one or two dives to that sort of depth before there would be concerns about delamination.
One of the issues with CFRP construction is that, because it's wrapped in layers, the interior experiences both tension and compression as the outer surface is compressed. The matrix may be strong in compression, but it's weakened by the fibers running through it, and inward flexing of the fibers places the matrix bonding the layers together under tension, where it is weak. Over time, this can create voids and weak spots in the structure, eventually leading to rapid, catastrophic failure.
Seems like there's an important junction where the titanium cone is fastened to the CF cylinder. I suppose the high pressure could make that joint somewhat self sealing with the right design.I agree the fibers will make the matrix weaker in compression.
But it's not just the compression they should worry about but also against deformation, even just tiny imperceptible amounts of deformation can lead to rapid progression of failure of a cylinder under high external pressure.
On the other hand, CF composites have very high stiffness to weight ratios and resists deformation very well. I suppose it's a bit of a compromise to sacrifice a little bit of compression strength to have good stiffness against deformation.
I also agree with more tests. Particularly with cyclic load testing. I did a search on it and found nothing. I can only assume OceanGate didn't do any cycle load tests on the pressure hull.
That would be a massive oversight on their part as it couldn't be that super expensive to do cycle load testing on a pressure vessel. You only need to enclose it in a slightly larger pressure vessel built of cheap but strong material like steel and opened and closed with many bolts. Nothing too elaborate nor prohibitively expensive. Put the test article inside. Sealed and bolted shut. Fill with sea water, increase pressure to max design depth using compressed air. Cycle pressure to simulate cycle loads of repeated dives. They can also cycle temperature in addition to simulate changes in temperature at different depths.
I don't know how many cycles it needs to survive to be deemed safe and still remain economical but the test itself is entirely economically feasible and OceanGate could have easily done the cycle load testing themselves.
They could also test in addition the resilience of the pressure hull against the implosion of equipment like the external cameras or any external equipment that can implode under high external pressure. They can see if the human occupied pressure vessel can survive the shockwaves from equipment implosions.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?