c u g min cuming you. 225 Bodwell Street Avon, MA 02322.1148 1.800.432 .6464 Fax 508.580.0960 www.cumingcorp.com PRODUCT INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL DATA ESTIMATING HYDROSTATIC PERFORMANCE DISCLAIMER: This note is provided for general information only and is not an engineering specification; it should never be used for designing or specifying materials or products. Data for any specific purpose or application must be requested from and verified by the manufacturer. 48 6464 m Technical Note 100-2-A PRODUCT INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL DATA TECHNICAL NOTE 100-2-A DISCLAIMER: This note is provided for general information only and is not an engineering specification; it should Page 1 of 2 Estimating Hydrostatic PErformancE never be used for designing or specifying materials or products. Data for any specific purpose or application must be requested from and verified by the manufacturer. INTRODUCTION [2] CAL NOTE 100-2-A Syntactic foam may lose some portion of its buoyancy when WP = X(Log NH) + Y WHERE: WP = Percent weight gain = 100( ΔW/W), % subjected to hydrostatic pressure. Most of the initial loss is due ΔW = Weight gained due to water absorption, lbs to elastic compression, whereas most of the long-term loss is W = Initial weight before test, lbs due to water absorption. Understanding the loss mechanism enN = Number of cycles to pressure [2] WP = X(Log NH) + Y TION ables the designer to manage short and long-term behavior. This H = Total number of hours at pressure ay lose somenote portion of itsabuoyancy provides few ruleswhen of thumb for estimating WHERE: the WP approxi= Percent weight gain = 100( % Log ΔW/W), = Logarithm to base 10 ostatic pressure. of of theimmersion initial losson is syntactic due mateMost effects foam. ΔW = Weight gained due to water absorption, lbs X,Y = Dimensionless empirical constants ssion, whereas most of the long-term loss is W = Initial weight before test, lbs For a single hydrostatic test, N = 1.0. Factors X and Y can be ELASTIC LOSS rption. Understanding the loss mechanism enN = Number of cycles to pressure used as needed to adjust results to match known data. If testto manage Elastic short and This to hydrostatic pressure H = Total number of hours at pressure losslong-term is directlybehavior. proportional and ing is being performed at rated service pressure PR and no prior w rules of thumb for estimating thetoapproxi= Logarithm 10 inversely proportional the bulk modulus of the Log syntactic foam, to base data is known, X may be assumed in most cases to be 1.0 and mersion on syntactic foam. as expressed in Equation 1: X,Y = DimensionlessYempirical constants = 0, and Equation 2 takes on its simplest form WP = Log H as For a single hydrostatic test, Nillustrated = 1.0. Factors X and1.Y can be in Figure [1] VP = 100(P/K) OSS used as needed to adjust results to match known data. If testWHERE: VP = Percent change in volume = 100( ΔV/V), % ctly proportional to hydrostatic pressure and 1 ing is being performed at rated FIGURE service pressure PR and no prior ΔV of = Change in volume of pressurization, onal to the bulk modulus the syntactic foam,as a result data is known, X may be assumed in most cases to be 1.0 and cubic ft quation 1: Y = 0, and Equation 2 takes on its 3.0% simplest — form WP = Log H as V = Original volume before pressurization, cubic ft illustrated in Figure 1. 00(P/K) P = Hydrostatic pressure, psi — rcent change in volumeK==100( ΔV/V), % of syntactic foam, psi Bulk modulus FIGURE 1 2.0% — hange in volume as a result of typically pressurization, Syntactic foam is designed so that volume strain VP bic ft — WP is 1.0% at rated service pressure PR. Therefore, bulk modulus 3.0% — iginal volume before pressurization, cubic ft can be estimated as K = 100 x the hydrostatic pressure at rated 1.0% — drostatic pressure, psi service depth. Volume strain in syntactic foam of — 3.0% or more Weight Gain % = WP = Log H ulk modulus may of syntactic foam, psi — lead to catastrophic collapse, crushing, and permanent loss ating Hydrostatic PErformancE 2.0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — typically designed so that volume strain VP of buoyancy. 0% — — WP rvice pressure PR. Therefore, bulk modulus 24 72 120 168 216 264 312 ABSORPTION as K = 100 xWATER the hydrostatic pressure at rated 1.0% — H,HOURS ume strain inThe syntactic 3.0%under or more rate at foam whichofwater pressure enters the cellular struc-Weight Gain % = WP = Log H — Estimated weight gain due to water absorption versus time at rophic collapse, crushing, and permanent ture of syntactic foam tends toloss diminish over time, similar to the constant pressure PR. logarithmic function in Equation 2: 0% — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — SORPTION 24 72 PAGE 2 120CONT. ON168 H,HOURS 216 264 312 water under pressure enters the cellular strucdue cannot to water absorption time at is an uncontrolledweight documentgain and therefore be assumed to be currentversus or accurate; it should oam tends to diminish over time, similar toWARNING: the This note Estimated constant pressure never be used for designing or specifying materialsPor R.products. Data for any specific purpose must first be requested from on in Equation 2: and verified by the manufacturer. Cuming Corporation Technical Note 100-2-A Date of last revision: July 11, 2012 and verified by the manufacturer. CONT. ON PAGE 2 WARNING: This note is an uncontrolled document and therefore cannot be assumed to be current or accurate; it should never be used for designing or specifying materials or products. Data for any specific purpose must first be requested from and verified by the manufacturer. Cuming Corporation Technical Note 100-2-A Date of last revision: July 11, 2012 call Toll Free: within USA 800-432-6464 or ++508-580-2660 or visit: www.afglobalcorp.com/cumingcorp Technical Note 100-2-A Page 2 of 2 SAFETY FACTOR FIGURE 3 The rate of water absorption is inversely proportional to the safety factor, or ratio of crush pressure to rated service pressure, as shown in Equation 3: [3] SF = PC /PR SF = Safety factor, dimensionless ratio PC = Crush pressure or hydrostatic strength, psi PR = Pressure at rated service or intended use depth, psi WHERE: The offshore industry standard for marine riser is API 16F, which specifies a minimum safety factor of 1.25 for syntactic foam buoyancy modules on drilling risers. This is the idealized service condition upon which Figure 1 is based. As shown in Figure 2, lesser SF increases the rate of water absorption while greater SF lowers the water absorption rate. This gives rise to the general rating practice shown in Figure 3. — Non-critical/short-term: expendable or one-time use 1.25 General purpose: drilling risers, ROVs, most buoys 1.50 Long-term: production risers, subsea equipment 2.00 or More Critical/safety: man-rated submersibles, safety devices Note: These ratings are for general guidance only and should not be used without consulting the manufacturer or cognizant regulatory agencies. Water absorption is primarily a surface phenomenon and proportional to surface area, whereas weight and buoyancy are volume-related. The result is that percent weight gain is influenced by the area-to-volume (A/V) ratio of the buoy. A large simple shape generally has a small A/V ratio (less weight gain) while a small complex shape has a larger A/V ratio (more weight gain). And it must be remembered that weight gain percentage is not always the same as buoyancy loss percentage, since the relative proportions of weight and buoyancy vary as a function of syntactic foam density. 5.0 — — 4.0 — — R = Relative Rate of Water Absorption — OTHER EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE 2.0 — API 16F — 1.0 — — 0— 1.00 Less Than 1.25 AREA-TO-VOLUME RATIO AND DENSITY EFFECTS 6.0 — 3.0 — TYPICAL USES OR APPLICATIONS Typical syntactic foam depth rating practices. FIGURE 2 R SAFETY FACTOR SF=PC /PR 1.25 1.50 1.75 SAFETY FACTOR SF=PC /PR 2.00 Typical effect of hydrostatic pressure on rate of water absorption. Pressure cycling has a fatigue effect on syntactic foam that can be estimated by using the N factor in Equation 2. Raising the water temperature will also increase the water absorption rate; specially formulated high temperature epoxy binder materials are available to address this problem. Attempts to develop “accelerated” testing methods have not been entirely successful, so that careful extrapolation from reliable historical longterm test data remains the best way to predict performance. It is recommended that users contact Cuming Corporation for expert assistance in designing syntactic foam products. For more information, see our web site www.cumingcorp.com. Page 2 of 2 call Toll Free: within USA 800-432-6464 or ++508-580-2660 or visit: www.afglobalcorp.com/cumingcorp
© Copyright 2024