-----Original Message-----
From: GSedlacek@jjma.com
[mailto:GSedlacek@jjma.com]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 10:39 AM
To: Matthew Hawkins
Cc: Forcucci, David; Gary Sedlacek (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Hastelloy C and Healy Science
Seawater modifications
Hi,
We have had quite a history with CRES 304L on
the Healy. It was installed
in the seawater system, and lasted until just
after the waranty was over.
The 304L failed due to pitting. CRES 316L is a better material than 304L
in seawater.
However, whenever there is stagnant seawater in 316L, it has
a strong tendancy to pit. Once pitting starts, it tends to continue
since
the water velocity in the pitted area is
usually very low.
If we could operate the system for years on
end without securing it, we
might have a chance of success with
316L. Even then, if there area bolted
sections with gaskets or other similar
situations, we could get pitting.
Hastelloy C or titanium are much better
materials for this seawater system.
Either material will last much longer than
the 316L. In my opinion, the
Hastelloy C is probably a better choice
because it is lower cost, and the
pumps, although they are special order, are
not as hard to get as the
titanium pumps. If there are any questions, please let me know.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Hawkins
[mailto:hawkins@UDel.Edu]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 5:55 AM
To: Forcucci, David
Subject: Re: Hastelloy C and Healy Science
Seawater modifications
David-
We're in detailed design for our new coastal
research vessel right now -
which, of course, involves piping
systems. We've tried to go with PVC
where ever ABS will let us - which
(unfortunately) is not too many
places!
We'll be able to do PVC or Teflon systems in our case because
we won't penetrate WT bulkheads - labs are
directly above scientific sea
chests and labs are "weather tight"
only. Your arrangement is probably
very different. We'll have to have a metal (SS) seachest and seacock
(per ABS), but PVC and/or Teflon from
there. For "trace metal
clean"
folks, we'll use dedicated systems over the
side - not through a sea
chest.
Question for you. We've been considering 316L for a number of other
salt water systems on board. We've used "regular" SS on our
current
vessel with mixed results - though pipes
appear pristine, we've seen a
number of pin hole leaks develop. Our naval architect is under the
impression that 316L (the highest/marine
grade) does not have this
problem.
What kind of corrosion have you seen with
316L? What kind of service
was it in, and how long did it last? All we have heard so far is
hear-say - some specific info would be most
helpful.
Many Thanks,
Matt Hawkins
Director, Marine Operations
R/V CAPE HENLOPEN
-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Zettler [mailto:ezettler@sea.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 5:49 AM
To: 'Forcucci, David'
Subject: RE: Hastelloy C and Healy Science Seawater modifications
Hi Dave,
Is there a reason you need to use metal pumps? If not, I suggest the March Manufacturing pumps and plastic piping, as used on SEA and many of the UNOLS vessels.
EZ
Erik R. Zettler
Science Coordinator
Sea Education Association
P.O. Box 6, Woods Hole, MA 02543, U.S.A.
ph: 508-540-3954 x29 fax: 508-457-4673
email: ezettler@sea.edu website: www.sea.edu
-----Original
Message-----
From: Kluckhohn, Robert [mailto:Bob.Kluckhohn@usap.gov]
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2003 8:02 PM
To: Forcucci, David
Cc: Michaelson, Don; Campbell, Aaron
Subject: Healy notebook and RE: Hastelloy C and Healy Science Seawater
modifications
Hi Dave,
I have been thinking about the intake and I am wondering what will happen in 10/10 ice with snow. Will the intake clog with snow. Second question the hull will conduct heat out of the box... if you are drawing -1.8 SW and the hull is -2 or -4 degrees what will prevent the whole box from becoming a big block of ice?
Consider a second intake on the skag... just a pipe opening. The new ice breaker we considering to replace the NBP may have keel for the sweep array and the sea water intake. We are also considering an intake forward on the hull for long transits. If you can create an intake that can be opened for the long transits it may be of interest to trace metal chemists that want to collect water while the vessel is underway. Just a thought.
The pumps we use are macerator pumps and they are food grade. We have not had a problem with rust. The pump heads have a Teflon head in the pump chamber. I am not familiar with Hastelloy C...
Cheers,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Shailer Cummings
[mailto:Shailer.Cummings@noaa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 7:14 AM
To: Forcucci David
Subject: Re: Hastelloy C and Healy Science
Seawater modifications
Hi Dave -
I've was involved in the Sea Water system on
the RCCL EXPLORER of the
Seas (www.rsmas.miami.edu/rccl) and read your
proposal with interest.
The system installed on the EXPLORER is a
"flowing by-pass system": the
water flows through a manifold and up over
the side. Water is drawn off
the manifold to feed sensors. This design minimizes the residence
time.
Some of the water is sent up to the Ocean lab 75m farther aft and
14 meters higher. This Lab water passes through a maifold discharge
system and then up 4 decks and over the
side. The reason for going up
before discharge is to maintain head pressure
the same all though the
system.
This way as faucets are opened/closed there is no pressure/flow
difference at any of the sensors,
consequently no flow re-adjustment. At
the high discharge point the water is dumped
into a large deck drain to
break any siphon affect. Now my problem is cleaning the system and I
think that I will use a high pressure water
hose snake( drain cleaning
type) and possibly an air propelled sponge
(from GoodWay PJ-1200-60)to
wipe the inside of the long feed run. The system is teflon lined
stainless with a PVDF (plastic) head
pump. Our pump would not be
suitable for ice.
Good luck with the improvements,
Shailer
-----Original Message-----
From: Dale Chayes
[mailto:dale@ldeo.columbia.edu]
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 5:55 PM
To: Forcucci, David
Cc: aicc@unols.uscg.mil; Brown, April LCDR;
Glenn Cota (E-mail)
(E-mail); Jackie Grebmeier (E-mail); Meister,
Neil LCDR
Subject: Re: Healy science seawater
Modifications for Dry Dock 2003
Dave,
With regard to the draft plan, in my quick
read, I missed two things,
perhaps buried in references, that are
outlined here:
1) The existing (or spare) SeaBird
"remote" temperature probe has to
get mounted (or re-mounted?) in the
re-plumbing forward, and,
2) The plumbing (perhaps with the exception
of the headed overflow
line) should be insulated to keep the water
from from warming as it
wends its way through the vessel.
I note that this work requires integration
into the vessels monitoring
system and I think that is a good idea. I
didn't catch provision to
reverse the pump(s) from ECC. Should that be
included in this round?
If so, where is the reverse flow to be drawn
from? (Hopefully not by
sucking water out of the pipes running aft to
science systems such as
the TSG which would be likely to implode.)
One would need to provide a
head tank or check-valved reservoir (of
"clean" water.)
I also think that there should be a prominent
statement in the
beginning, perhaps as part of the intro
(Scope), where the intent is
stated as installing new plumbing, pumps, etc
that the purpose of the
work should be stated. Perhaps the by adding
to the first sentence
something like:
"to achieve the goal(s)
of........".
I can't think of any reason why one wouldn't
tell the bidders what
problem is supposed to be solved by this
work, but perhaps that is a
naive view?
A couple of other comments:
Figures:
--------
I did look at the separate (very nice) PDF
rendering of the sea-chest
and separator designs. However, I found that
many of the figures in the
draft plan did not render properly (the
piping arrangements for
instance) when I opened the document in MS
Word (Office X with all the
current updates). Perhaps they are not (yet) in this version or
perhaps they were "linked" rather
than embedded in the Word file. It
might be a better (more portable and
generally more accessible) if the
"plan" document was provided as a
PDF with the figures embedded.
Section numbering:
------------------
This version jumps from section 1 (Scope) to
Section 3.1 without
Section 2. Seems odd.
-Dale