EIS HRC Test Report - PC501 - Chambers Oceanicss/SAT Brokers/EIS... · A Member of IMCA KB Associates Pte Ltd Project – P501 Report - EIS-HRC-PC501-08 Date – 3rd – 6 th September

A Member of IMCA

KB Associates Pte Ltd Project – P501 Report - EIS-HRC-PC501-08 Date – 3rd – 6th September 2008

KBA a Total Quality Management Company

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

HRC THERMAL & ENVIRONMENTAL TEST REPORT

HYPERBARIC RESCUE CRAFT

Mobile Saturation System Hyperbaric Evacuation System (HES)

EIS OFFSHORE SERVICES PTE LTD

SAT-01 HRC

SINGAPORE SEPTEMBER 2008

TEST REPORT # DATE LOCATION KB Associates Pte Ltd

Representative EIS-HRC-PC501-08 3rd – 6th September2008 Loyang,

Singapore Brendan Kearns

Distribution List EIS OFFSHORE SERVICES PTE LTD 1 x Original Hard Copy

1 x Soft Copy CDR

A Member of IMCA


Page 2 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

HRC THERMAL & ENVIRONMENTAL TEST REPORT

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................3

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................7 2.1 Points For In Use Consideration ............................................................................. 11

3.0 TEST PROCEDURE .....................................................................................12

4.0 TESTS PERFORMED, LIMITATIONS AND OBSERVATIONS..................17

5.0 TEST RESULTS GRAPHS AND NOTATIONS ...........................................18

6.0 DATA GRAPHS AND PROVEN POINTS....................................................22

7.0 THERMAL CALCULATIONS:......................................................................30

7.1 Theoretical calculation ............................................................................................ 30 7.2 Consequences.......................................................................................................... 32 7.3 Observations ........................................................................................................... 32 7.4 Possible Environmental Conditions ........................................................................ 33 7.5 Target Temperatures ............................................................................................... 33

8.0 CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................34

APPENDIX 1 - INSTRUMENTS LIST & CERTIFICATION ....................................36

AUTOMATIC DATA LOGGER ........................................................................................ 42 TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY SENSORS ............................................................... 43 CO2 CALIBRATED DIGITAL FLOW METER................................................................ 48 VISI FLOAT DWYER FLUID FLOW METER................................................................. 53

APPENDIX 2 - VESSEL INSULATION DETAILS..................................................55

APPENDIX 3 LOCATION OF PROBES .............................................................60

APPENDIX 4 - PHOTOGRAPHS............................................................................64

A Member of IMCA


Page 3 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

1.0 INTRODUCTION

KB Associates Pte Ltd was contracted to perform the Hyperbaric Evacuation System (HES) thermal testing procedure for EIS Offshore Services Pte Ltd (EIS) of their Hyperbaric Rescue Chamber (HRC). The HRC is a dual purpose deck chamber fitted out for three man living or nine man rescue. The unit was located at EIS’s yard at Loyang Offshore Supply Base, Singapore. The tests were aimed at simulating chamber environmental working parameters while working in winter* (see note below), summer or tropical conditions.

The HES comprises a DDC that has been outfitted as a Hyperbaric Evacuation Unit for the purpose of rescue and a living space for normal use, and a life support package in a separate and dedicated container that consists of one panel and a control unit for heat and cooling.

The access to the chamber for occupants while in SAT is via a trunking from the main system lock to the main HRC lock. A medical lock is available in the main lock of the HRC. It is noted that the medical lock is sufficiently sized to fit the scrubber pots from the HCU unit. The medical lock outer door was fitted with an interlock.

The purely autonomous life support control, as located on the HRC, is supported by onboard batteries and gas supplies, HeO2 and O2, that are said to be sufficient to last for at least 24 hours, (onboard battery capacity 270 ah at 24 VDC) The protocol covers 24 hours however due consideration to IMO and many flag state requirements of 72 hours autonomous support is reminded.

The environment control system comprises one water cooled chilling unit and heater, (heater to be installed), running off 3 phase, 440 VAC, 50 or 60 Hz. Fans within the HRC provide circulation of conditioned gas as well as the movement through the onboard scrubbers. The tests, amongst other issues, demonstrate the level of mixing or lack of mixing as represented by thermal layers which although it is accepted that gases will over time fully integrate, slugs of pure gas such as oxygen or Carbon dioxide would present a danger if allowed to accumulate.

Hypothermia tests were carried out however the ambient temperature, already being warm leaves room for margins of error. The results do prove a degree of capacity. Hyperthermia tests were carried out using the stated value of 200 Watts per diver, with the maximum number of divers i.e. twelve, for summer and tropical conditions. Humidity control did not feature as part of this test as the control was not sufficiently fine and in this instance was not in fact in place. The chamber is designated for nine personnel in evacuation and therefore general heat input was set for 1.8 kW excluding the approximated 4.58 amp emitted by the exchanger fans, scrubber fans and lights. Exothermic heat produced by the soda sorb scrubbing action was overcome by the chilling capacity which the results take into account.

The tests cover the thermal and CO2 absorption abilities of the system and demonstrate the effectiveness of the thermal cladding however all other items remain outside the scope of this report. It is noted herein that the vessel does have an autonomous launching system and was proven to float. The floating is further stabilised using foam filled, polyester resin R-110 PT soaked chopped fibre glass matt to form blocks which in turn are filled with polyurethane foam 4530 and are located within the top section frame work. A float test was performed subsequent to the environment test and is the subject of a second report where the findings need to be detailed.

*Winter conditions were tested only by means of determining if heat rise was possible from the

nominal original temperature. It is likely that real winter conditions would require more of the

reserve however the test proved that capacity does exist. The results did however show that given time

for the hot water to get into the pipe work, the heating was reasonably rapid.

A Member of IMCA


Page 4 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS Unit Serial No: 4639070122 Manufactured by: Steel Forming & Rolling Specialists Pte Ltd Year Built: 2008 Design Code: ASME VIII Div 1 + PVHO Maximum Depth Rating: 200 msw Maximum Design Pressure: 290 psi Test Pressure: 438 psi Third Party Authority: Americal Bureau of Shipping – Pacific Div. SG 893707-3 Insulation Thickness 25mm Material Armaflex Class 1 (See attachment) Coating 3 layer Glass Fibre Matt View ports Medical Lock Fitted to dished end 350mm Dia x 377mm depth Fitted with: Lighting LB 20 2 x 20 Watt (1 amp each), total 2 amps Emergency Scrubber jhem 1 unit 10kg (0.8 amp each), total 0. 8 amps Chamber Condition Unit Weng Huat 2 units (0.69 amp each) total 1.38 amps Chamber Blower Exchanger Weng Huat 1 unit (0.69 amp), total 0.69 amp LIFE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

The ‘flyaway’ package is contained in a standard 10’ x 8’ steel container. Comprising of a single unit control panel, five HP ‘Copland’ chiller and separate 12 kW/heater unit (to be fitted) that operates on 440 VAC, 50 or 60 Hz.

ONBOARD HRC

GAS HeO2

Size 50 ltr x 200 bar Quantity 3 bottles

Method of pressure reduction into HRC Tescom BPR O2

Size 50 ltr x 200 bar Quantity 3 bottles

Method of pressure reduction into HRC Tescom BPR BATTERY Capacity 6 x 12 VDC (3 x 24 VDC) @45 ah = 270 ah

A Member of IMCA


Page 5 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

ONBOARD INTERNAL EQUIPMENT Scrubber/jhem 1 x 10 kg c/w 1 fans of 0.8 amp Conditioning unit, WH 2 units c/w x 9.2 kg Soda lime capacity and

3 fans each of 0.23 amps (total 0.69 amp ea) Blower/Exchanger Unit 3 fans of 0.23 amp (total 0.69 amp) Personnel Scrubbers Load out requirement BIBS Load out requirement Seatbelts Load out requirement Hard hats Load out requirement Internal lights 2 at 20 Watts (1 amp each) Drinking water Load out requirement Food rations Load out requirement First aid equipment Load out requirement Toilet facility Available c/w interlock Washing facility Available in entry lock TOTAL AMPS DRAWN 4.87 Amps

ONBOARD EXTERNAL EQUIPMENT 24 hour light beacon Load out requirement Emergency Radio Beacon (EPRB) Load out requirement Radar reflector Load out requirement Onboard Oxygen 3 x 50 litre x 200 bar Onboard HeO2 3 x 50 litre x 200 bar ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SYSTEM The Environmental Control system provides an autonomous (remote from main system), means of controlling the temperature and the CO2 content of the HRC atmosphere. The temperature is controlled by circulating chilled or heated water through heat exchangers located inside the HRC. EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS INTERNAL EQUIPMENT Internal temperature is controlled by re-circulated, temperature controlled and treated water which is pumped through the onboard heat exchangers via an umbilical from the purpose built life support ‘flyaway’ package. The flow pressure of the heated water was 4.5 bar and the chilling water was 9 bar, each with a flow capacity output of circa 4.5 gpm (17 lpm). Seawater is required to be pumped for the condenser cooling however for the test, fresh water, cooled by a fan cooled cooling tower was used with an average water temperature of some 23°C. CO2 is removed by circulating the atmosphere via electrically driven fans, through a series of soda lime filled containers, comprising a total of 28.4 kg of soda lime that the results of the test proved to scrub the atmosphere for a period of time.

A Member of IMCA


Page 6 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Requirements Cooling (max) 1.8 kW CO2 removal 4.41 lpm Equipment Capacity Heating Source Electric immersion heater, 12 kW Fluid Re-circulated and conditioned fresh water Pump Hot Water circulation pump – Burks centrifugal

c/w electric TECO motor Equipment Capacity Cooling Capacity 5 HP Copeland, Copelamatic Source 50 / 60 Hz, 440 VAC Fluid Closed circuit treated fresh water Refrigerant R-22 Pumps Cold Water circulation pump – Burks centrifugal

c/w TECO motor Sea Water suction pump – Pedrolo CP25/160B

Compressor Copeland 380/440V- 3Ph-50/60Hz, R-22 with shut-off service valves and crankcase heater.

Heat Exchanger Fitted Condenser Fitted

A Member of IMCA


Page 7 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The EIS Offshore Services Pte Ltd HRC was subjected to a series of tests in line with IMCA D02/06 and based on it being a dual purpose hyperbaric rescue craft fitted out for three men living or nine man rescue. The body of this report will detail the tests however this summary is designed as a brief to the tests carried out and the essential results obtained. The guidance note D02/06 highlights a series of tests to be completed. The document has a technical note of the same number, both dated January 2006. The order of the test may not necessarily be as per the document and where it is either not applicable or impossible, some tests may not have been performed. Noted below are the tests carried out or omitted along with the basic reasoning and result. CO2 scrubbing initially proved to hold the flow however the concentration level was above the required limit. Subsequent test with an additional scrubber has enabled a hold below the concentration level for a period of time. The effect on consumption is included in the workings above. Base line test: A test designed to gather basic information on the transference of heat from internal to external and vis versa without the impact of any machinery or personnel affecting the results. The test is a 24 hour hold at 4 bar absolute on a HeO2 mix during which time a fully day/night cycle of external temperature and radiant heat effects are compared with the internal temperature movement. This test was performed with no cover however the ambient external temperature and radiant changes were tempered by the cloud cover and rain on what proved to be a relatively cool period. Although extremes were not available, the internal to external comparison was noted. There was a lagging and reduced ‘following’ effect, reduced from the external environment change which would probably have increased in relative separation should external extremes have been more pronounced. (ref GR 1) The base line test also provided evidence that the effect of the steel hull alone provides no insulation properties as may be seen by the external to internal hull comparison.

Equipment reliability A prime component of the trial is to confirm that equipment can run for extended periods of time. The total trial for the mechanical tests is 24 hours inclusive with balance time following the tests being used to confirm that continued running of equipment would not highlight otherwise unforeseen problems. A set of controlled events were scheduled during the period of test, some of the effects of which may be seen on the “Controlled Events” graph (ref GR2) As the tests were performed, it was not part of the function of all tests to use, for example the chiller, however this was left running on closed circuit so as to reasonably assimilate the running hours.

A Member of IMCA


Page 8 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Gas Movement - Circulation Circulation is performed by means of fan action used to promote the cooling and CO2 scrubbing. Air movement was measured prior to the tests being performed and the results were as follows:

Air movement at 300mm form the fan were as follows: CCU 1, suction at circa 0.8 m/s, blow at 1.2 m/s CCU 2, suction at circa 0.8 m/s, blow at 1.1 m/s Exchanger Blower, fan #1 = 1.8 m/s, #2 = 2 m/s & #3 = 2.1 m/s Scrubber fan blow at 1.8 m/s

Heat sensors placed within the chamber unit as detailed within the document D-02/06 have indicated a degree of thermal layering as being very minimal such that the between the upper and lower, plus between the near end (medical lock side) and far end (entry lock side) there proved to be an average temperature variance of 0.5°C while.. This would be worsened by the placement of divers whose legs would restrict the free gas movement however it is very reasonable and other factors such as divers breath would alter some of the concluded mixing characteristics marginally. CO2 Scrubbing

CO2 scrubbing is an essential and intrinsic part of the life support requirement. The scrubbing must be able to perform to the required level from totally autonomous power and consumables. The test aims at establishing firstly if the scrubbing can be effective and secondly the approximate life cycle of the scrubbing consumable without change. Scrubbing was performed using two Weng Huat CCU units, each containing 9.2 kg (two canisters of 4.6 kg each) of soda lime. An additional scrubber, namely a jhem 10 kg unit provides emergency additional coverage to take into consideration a full compliment of divers. With the 18.4 kg in the Weng Huat CCU’s and a further 10 kg in the jhem scrubber a total of 28.4 kg of soda lime was used. The result of the CO2 injection test was, after an initial surge, stabilised and held below the prescribed maximum permitted level of 1000 ppm in atmosphere. The total time at which the CO2 in atmosphere remained at less than 1000 ppm was 4 hours and 45 minutes at an injection rate of 4410 ml per minute representing 9 divers exhaling 490ml per minute each. The ability to scrub was noted to continually and gradually lesson over the stated time period however, it was noted also that the increase in atmospheric CO2 was not excessively rapid even when beyond 1000 ppm.

Humidity Control The chamber, as supported by the main system control unit that should be capable of supporting humidity. The emergency life support control unit, at the time of test, did not have a heating ability and even with a heater, it would need to be controllable in order to adjust the humidity. It is therefore unlikely that humidity control would be feasible while using the Life Support ‘flyaway’ package.

A Member of IMCA


Page 9 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Test 1 – Hypothermia Heating This test aims at ensuring capacity to heat personnel within the confined space assuming a minimum of personnel emitting only 150 Watts each. A minimum is defined at two divers therefore the heat input for the test was 300 Watts. The test for hypothermia was performed against an ambient external temperature of circa 29°C. The internal temperature was brought up from 31.27°C to 34.89°C in 1 hour and 34 minutes using heated water from the pumped 12 kW supply. Note: The test was carried

out using the source of heated water from the normal CMU. The test is only applicable provided that

the set up uses similar equipment and heating capacity, stated as intended for addition into the flyaway

package.

The results of this test proved that capacity was available and that given time, the heat would continue to rise in both the heated supply and the internal environment. The capacity was not tested to its extent as it would have required a heat removal source of known capacity or conditions that would have allowed a failure point of the equipment to be achieved. The equipment proved positively able to rise the internal temperature well within its operational range. The time for the rise was however not very rapid and as such, if a capacity of three or less people in clod climates, it is advised to provide thermal clothing. Note: At the time of test, a heating system was not fitted into the ‘flyaway’ package. Heat for the test

was provided from the 12 kW heaters of the normal CMU’s and therefore for the test to be applicable

an exactly similar system must be established within the ‘flyaway’ package.

Test 2 – Hyperthermia – Summer Test incorporated in the more extreme ‘Tropical’ test, Test 3 Test 3 – Hyperthermia – Tropical This test aims at considering if the cooling capacity of machinery as contained in the Emergency Life Support ‘flyaway’ Package (LSP) is sufficient to remove heat build up in the HRC against a load that includes body heat at a rate of 200 Watts per occupant together with all electrical items including fans and lights plus exothermic heat produced by the catalytic scrubbing action of the soda lime. The results of this test proved positively that the cooling system was able to bring and maintain the system well below the target temperature of 32°C as set in the document IMCA D02/06. No noted problems against an input heat load of 1.8 kW, plus all fans, lights and exothermic heat produced was noted. Note: exothermic temperature rise is a known factor and was part of the test however in this

case, the original equipment failed to accommodate the amount of CO2 input and a second trial

specifically for the CO2 scrubber was later performed. The test did have CO2 (ineffective) performed

and the effective trial was superimposed over the test results for the purpose of diagramaphic example.

During the test it was also observed that the thermal difference (mixing) was almost complete with approximately less than 0.5ºC difference between readings taken from the bottom and those taken at the top of the chamber and also those taken at one side from those taken from the other side. Note:

mixing is important to ensure that gas mixes freely and rapidly. Thermo dynamics would dictate that

gas does mix eventually even if not disturbed by the gas flow.

A Member of IMCA


Page 10 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Test 4 – Assessment of the Maximum Cooling Capacity Available This test aims at establishing the maximum spare cooling capacity or if not established to determine a reasonable level above the set target that the equipment may be proven to cope. The test is performed by increasing the heat load in increments until it is noted that the cooling system can not maintain control. The heat input commenced at 1.8 kW and was increased to 2.2 kW and 2.6 kW respectively. The average heat was not seen to increase (in point of fact it continued to cool) and therefore the excess capacity was in excess of 0.8 kW. The results of the test that was performed using steps of 400 Watt increments and proved to have no negative effect on the internal environment event up to a total added input of 0.8 kW, thereby being 2.6 kW. Allowing for a conservative estimate i.e. that extra capacity is still available, the system does provide for at least a further 0.8 kW of additional capacity for the 1.8 kW required. Test 5 - Cooling System Failure The aim here is to establish the ‘safe’ time available in the event that either the cooling system should fail or the occupied system is free of all support for an unavoidable period of time, such as the launch into the sea of the HRC and thus allowing available time for consideration by the risk assessment. The test requires a time count for 1ºC. This was done over a range of 5 ºC and the average is the mean !st Test (5) at start of thermal trial 2nd Test (5) at end of thermal trial

Temp Deg C Time Temp Deg C Time

27.85 09:48 28.92 06:58 28.85 10:01 29.91 07:01

29.85 10:55 30.93 07:09 31.92 07:26

32.92 07:52 Mean Time per Deg C 19 mins Mean Time per Deg C 10.8 mins

Note: the first test applied failed to show a conclusive result as the equipment did not come on line

until longer than anticipated (note the temperature curve). The second result gives a more realistic

version of events.

The results - The initial heat rise is rapidly tempered to an almost linear rise and conservatively given the above, a rise of 1°C in 10.8 minutes would be a good stating point for any risk assessment considering that the unit would under normal conditions be maintained in chilled conditions therefore assuming an HRC holding temperature of 27°C (for example), the safe time available (as per the NPD upper physiological limit of 35°C) would be approximately 1 hour and 44 minutes.

A Member of IMCA


Page 11 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

2.1 Points For In Use Consideration When connected to the ‘flyaway’ life support package, the HRC can provide a thermally balanced escape method that with correct and careful control will enable life sustainability indefinitely. The points of concern are briefly as follows; 2.1.1 Life support for a sustained period of time does require the support of the life support package.

The ability to connect to that package in the event that the HRC remains in the water needs to be considered for ease of implementation. This is partially achieved by the umbilical that is present on top of the HRC however a further consideration is to the possible snatching effect should the umbilical be use.

2.1.2 Life support equipment, stored in the container and unlikely to be touched for considerable

periods may fail to work. Part of regular checks should be the running up of this equipment and where electronic equipment is maintained in insulated conditions.

2.1.3 The condensers should be fresh water rinsed following any salt water trials. 2.1.4 The testing was performed using personnel familiar with the equipment. Clear instructions for

the use by personnel less familiar should be in place. 2.1.5 The life support package requires 440 VAC, 50/60 Hz electric supply. These points need to be

confirmed as available when considering the set up as does the reliability of any ‘single’ piece of equipment. All components have to be checked to confirm if they are suitable for electrical suitability, voltage and Hz and match that supplied on the emergency resource vessel. If other resources are required, these also need to be addressed and itemised.

2.1.6 O2 and CO2 analysers need to be calibrated. Some provision for their calibration should be

considered i.e. the supply of small quantities of cal and zero gas plus a bladder. 2.1.7 All electrical equipment needs to be highlighted with appropriate warning signs. 2.1.8 A risk assessment needs to be in place and area/project specific where it includes the duration

that the HRC may not be connected to the life support package with due consideration given to the 1°C in 10.8 minutes internal heat rise with a full compliment of personnel.

A Member of IMCA


Page 12 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

3.0 TEST PROCEDURE Testing was to be in line with the IMCA test protocol as detailed under IMCA Information Note, “IMCA D 02/06”. IMCA require a level of 490 ml CO2 per diver. Based on nine divers, the injection rate of 4.41 lpm was set. The procedure was followed by the following;

• Install heater elements, inside the chamber and secure in such a fashion as to disperse the heat evenly. Connect the heaters via a wattage controller to the 220 - 240 VAC electric supply and check their proper operation. Note the amps drawn on the ammeters and confirm with external amp meter. Note also the available voltage and work out the necessary amps required for each of the settings using OHMS law.

• Install and test all the sensors. The placement to be as per that dictated by the applied document, D02/06 which came from the Australian standard AS2853-1986, and also additional for direct checking of thermal transfer and measurement of exothermic reaction.

• Fill all CO2 scrubbers with Soda-sorb. Weigh and record the soda sorb.

• Close the HRC door and pressurise to 4 bar absolute (30 msw) on a HeO2 mix.

• Perform tests 1 – 5 in accordance with the prescribed document and log at least every fifteen minutes for the effects. Automatic logging approx every eighteen seconds

• CO2 scrubbing test is to be performed only at the time of tests 2 – 5 while machinery is running that can combat the exothermic reaction.

To provide easy reference for readers of this report, a set of graphs have been produced that represent the data collected and is designed to allow the reader a clear view of events and consequences. Each graph has an author’s notation to briefly explain the “proven point”. All graphs are generated from the real figures obtained during the test and this data is provided in soft copy in the CD that accompanies the report.

A Member of IMCA


Page 13 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Extract taken from IMCA D02/06

Note: Not all tests indicated here were performed

Annex 1 – Outline of a HES Chamber Test Programme The testing of an HES involves complex procedures and a number of personnel including outside contractors. A test programme should be drawn up to ensure adequate liaison and co-ordination and the smooth running of tests.

An outline of the HES chamber test programme is provided in Annex 1.

TEMPERATE ZONE OPERATIONS Test 1: Hypothermia – 2 Divers (or minimum number of divers) This test is to be carried out to prove that the HES has the necessary heating capacity to keep the minimum number of divers who will be in the chamber at a comfortable temperature. The following can be used as a guideline for the test. In testing the HES it is important that all equipment is being operated as it would be in a real situation; that is with the engine running if applicable and supplying power and heating. If seawater* is used for cooling the chamber and engine then seawater should be used during the test. Testing on the quay side will enable the tests to be done with greater care and accuracy. 1 The chamber should be unmanned but fitted with heaters to provide the metabolic heat equivalent of the minimum and maximum number of divers. This is 150W per diver for hypothermia tests and 200W per diver for hyperthermia tests. 2 The chamber is to be pressurised to 4 bar absolute on 93/7 helium-oxygen gas mixture. 3 The required heating and scrubbers are to be activated. (See the technical note on how to introduce heat into the chamber). 4 CO2

is to be injected, using a flow meter, equivalent to the number of divers inside the chamber, that is 490 ml/min. times the number of divers. (This can be omitted from the hypothermia test if it is to be done in a hyperthermia test). 5 Measure the air/gas temperature and if possible the humidity and air movement at the prescribed positions If it is not possible to measure and assess gas movement at pressure, determine the air movements in the chamber at atmospheric pressure. This can be done using an anemometer and soap bubbles. Equipment in the chamber may make it difficult to make measurements at all recommended locations. Those in the middle of the chamber are the most important and should be done. 6. Analyse the chamber CO2

level, which should be maintained at less that 1000 ppm.

A Member of IMCA


Page 14 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

From the data collected estimate the thermal transmittance of the chamber and the heating required for the minimum number of divers at the maximum temperature gradient i.e. winter conditions, also the number of divers required to maintain the chamber at 32°C without heating. A chamber temperature of 32°C has been selected as a working figure as it is the mid range and the comfort temperature at a depth of 200m. As depth decreases this temperature comes down and for a particular situation a lower temperature may have to be selected. Test 2: Hyperthermia – Full Diving Complement – Summer Conditions This test is to determine if the chamber has the necessary cooling capacity to keep the maximum number of divers comfortable during the summer. Repeat test 1 with the heat load set for the maximum number of divers. Wait for equilibrium and hold on target for 90 minutes. The chamber temperature is then lowered so that the temperature gradient across the chamber wall is at a value that might be reached under summer conditions. For example, this could be a chamber temperature of 32°C and an outer wall temperature of 25°C giving a value of 7°C. If the outer wall of the chamber at the time of the test is at 5°C the chamber temperature should be set to 12°C so limiting heat flow to the environment to that anticipated under warm conditions. This places the full thermal load on the cooling system. However, it is possible that if sea water is being used to cool the chamber its temperature may be such that it is impossible to reach 12°C and a higher chamber temperature will have to be used. This is acceptable provided it can be shown that the system can remove the required amount of heat when it is using summer temperature sea water at the dive site. Note that in reducing the chamber temperature there is going to be a lag whilst heat is extracted from the gas, contents and structure of the chamber before the system comes into equilibrium. The heat from the divers can be switched on once the chamber and contents have cooled and gas temperature is on target. The target temperature ±1°C should be maintained for 90 minutes. If this cannot be achieved, the chamber has to remain at a stable temperature within the limits set by the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. The heat removed by the cooling system should be accurately measured and calculated (see Annex 3) and the thermal transmittance of the chamber estimated (see Annex 4). In evaluating the HES, a safety factor for the cooling system should be determined based on foreseeable increases in heat load from divers and the environment. For example, the cooling system could have an excess cooling capacity to enable it to deal with 10 year extremes of summer air and water temperatures.

A Member of IMCA


Page 15 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

TROPICAL ZONE Test 3: Hyperthermia – Full Diving Complement This test is to prove that the HES has sufficient cooling capacity to keep the divers at a comfortable temperature in foreseeable tropical conditions. The following can be used as a guideline for the test. 1. The HES should be out of the water to avoid any uncontrolled cooling effect from the water. This will also be the position of the HES in the standby situation before launching. 2. The chamber should be fitted with heating units of 200W per diver for the maximum number of divers that may be under pressure during the diving operation, or the maximum number of divers that the unit is designed for (see the technical note on how to introduce the heat). 3. The chamber should be pressurised to 4 bar absolute on 93/7 helium-oxygen. 4. The scrubbers are to be running and CO2

injected, using a flow meter, equivalent to the maximum number of divers. (490 ml/min per diver). 5. CO2

measurements are to be taken and the level should be less than 1000 ppm. 6. The chamber humidity will need to be recorded. 7. The chamber temperatures are to be measured as described for test 1. 8 For any set of conditions, e.g. number of divers, the test needs to run until the temperature has stabilised for a period of 90 minutes and is at the target temperature ±1°C or within the limits set by the NPD. The HES’s own systems are to be used during these tests, and the unit’s engine* (if any) is to be running if used in the cooling process. To save time, the chamber may be heated to 32°C or to the temperature of the living complex before the tests start. From the data collected the heat removed by the cooling system is to be determined as accurately as possible (see Annex 3) and the thermal transmittance value of the chamber estimated (see Annex 4). A safety factor for the cooling system is to be calculated based on foreseeable increases in heat load from the divers and environment.

A Member of IMCA


Page 16 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Test 4: Assessment of the Maximum Cooling Capacity Available In test 3, after the chamber temperature has remained stable for a period of 90 minutes, test for the maximum cooling capacity available. Proceed by increasing the heat input into the chamber by increments of about 400W whilst maintaining the chamber at its target temperature of 32°C. The cooling capacity will have to be increased by the same amount. This is done either by increasing the volume flow of sea water through the chamber heat exchanger, by reducing the glycol temperature, by increasing glycol volume flow or a through combination of both (see Annex 3). The compressor or sea water pump should not be overloaded. When a rise in the temperature of the chamber occurs it will indicate that the cooling system is no longer able to handle the heat load imposed on it. When this happens reduce heat input by one or two increments and maintain gas temperature at the target value for 90 minutes. Earlier signs of the system reaching its limit may be maximum glycol flow rates having to be used, glycol temperature increasing, the compressor not cutting out at intervals. Note that the maximum cooling capacity of the system is what it can maintain in the long term not what it can reach for a short period of time. Because of inefficiencies and heat pickup outside the chamber the actual cooling capacity is going to be lower than the manufacturer’s value for the chilling unit. This test should indicate what this cooling capacity is. Test 5: Cooling System Failure A foreseeable risk is the failure of the cooling system and a back up system and procedures will have to be in place to enable the crew to deal with the emergency. The crew will need to know the time course of the rise in chamber temperature following on failure of the cooling system. As it is not possible to simulate the thermal mass and inertia of the divers’ bodies the test results are only an estimate of the time course of the rise in chamber temperature. To determine the time taken for the chamber temperature to rise 3°C turn off the primary cooling system and record the change in temperature. Where a secondary cooling system or other contingency measures are available they should be tested by turning off the primary system only and the chamber temperature followed until it is established as stable over 90 minutes or the time it has taken to rise 3° C recorded. The complete evaluation test should cover day and night conditions and last a minimum of 24 hours.

A Member of IMCA


Page 17 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

4.0 TESTS PERFORMED, LIMITATIONS AND OBSERVATIONS

1. A base line test was performed over a period of 24 hours. 2. Tests 1 performed

3. Test 2 & 3 performed as one

4. Test 4 performed

5. Test 5 performed (two times)

6. Humidity test was attempted - The system has the necessary components to provide humidity

control however the finite capability to balance hot and cold input was not readily proven.

7. CO2 injection test was performed concurrently with other tests 2, 3, and 4 (note: second test

was also performed independently of other tests and superimposed on the results) with any exothermic reaction included in the effects and results.

8. Logging was automatic with live data appearing on the screen of the computer and confirmed

by independent instruments.

9. The equipment sensors were compared pre and post thermal test using an instrument calibrated against national standards.

10. IMCA state ninety minute holds to establish equilibrium for various tests however it is evident

that the shell may gradually assume the temperature of the internal ambient temperature and just as gradually emit that heat /chill back into the chamber. Insulation reduces the external effects however paradoxically the stored heat value of the hull is an important consideration. Storing at a lower temperature than necessary will greatly assist and prolong the occupant’s survival time in the event of a real emergency in warm conditions and heating the vessel above the normal living chamber would assist in cooler climates. Test 5 provides a measure for this and it was shown that the rate of heat rise from internally in terms of time acting heat reduced as internal temperature rises.

A Member of IMCA


Page 18 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

5.0 TEST RESULTS GRAPHS AND NOTATIONS Test; Base line information Base line test was performed with all probes in place and with no machinery running. The test included a continuous period of 24 hours and aimed at proving the relationship of internal to external environments as affected by the insulation. The external temperature ranged from 25.29 to 30.77°C. By contrast the internal mean temperature ranged from 26.08 to 29.57°C over the same period. The actual relationship of the external temperature to the internal temperature was suppressed to a limited significance and proved that the 25 mm ‘Armaflex’ insulation layer which proved to be effective. Any environment control externally applied would only marginally have to concern radiant or climatic fluctuations. Medical lock and man way entrances were not insulated and would have a limited effect on the transmission of heat relative to the area of the exposed surface. View ports were noted to have thermal properties broadly similar to those of the insulation.

Test; Gas Movement Internally, the HRC needs to have gas flow in order to ensure effectiveness of cooling, scrubbing and very importantly to prevent ‘layering’ that can, as well as make the environment uncomfortable, trap or slow CO2 and O2 mixing and allow build up of poisonous gasses. Internal flow is provided by two chamber conditioning units, a single exchanger blower unit and a single emergency scrubber. The temperature variants were notably small indicating that excellent thermal mixing and consequently gas mixing takes place within the lock. The results of the gas flow are best determined by comparison of the temperatures obtained near the top, at the middle and near the bottom of the HRC. Comparisons from one end to the other were also taken and the results all proved conclusive mixing, i.e. limited to no thermal layering. The results in this instance showed separation in the region of 0.5°C between the top and bottom. The test was performed without personnel in place and it is noted that some differences would likely occur should personnel be in side the lock and alter the free gas movement. It is however anticipated that such restrictions would be very limited given the divergence of gas flows. Circulation is performed by means of fan action used to promote the cooling and CO2 scrubbing. Air movement was measured prior to the tests being performed and the results were as follows:

Air movement at 300mm form the fan were as follows: CCU 1, suction at circa 0.8 m/s, blow at 1.2 m/s CCU 2, suction at circa 0.8 m/s, blow at 1.1 m/s Exchanger Blower, fan #1 = 1.8 m/s, #2 = 2 m/s & #3 = 2.1 m/s Scrubber fan blow at 1.8 m/s

Heat sensors placed within the chamber unit as detailed within the document D-02/06 have indicated a degree of thermal layering as being very minimal such that the between the upper and lower, plus between the near end (medical lock side) and far end (entry lock side) there proved to be an average

A Member of IMCA


Page 19 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

temperature variance of 0.5°C while.. This would be worsened by the placement of divers whose legs would restrict the free gas movement however it is very reasonable and other factors such as divers breath would alter some of the concluded mixing characteristics marginally. Test; Life support equipment function, reliability and sufficiency A prime component of the trial is to confirm that equipment can run for extended periods of time. The total trial for the mechanical tests is 24 hours inclusive with balance time following the tests being used to confirm that continued running of equipment would not highlight unforeseen problems. At no time were there any noises or other issues pertaining to potential lack of reliability and the equipment proved capable of providing the necessary life support functioning within its designed parameters save for points noted on the controllability. The HRC was tested using the services of the ‘flyaway’ package. Over a period of twenty four hours a series of tests were carried out in line with the IMCA protocol D02/06. This included CO2 absorption to 490 ml per diver and 200 Watts of heat input (based on the maximum no. of divers, 9). Graphs that follow, contained in Section 6 of this report, give visual indications of the results and were generated from the real data (but were superimposed over the trial test as the initial CO2 scrubbing was unable to cope and a different scrubber type was subsequently fitted) which was obtained with respect to the temperature and humidity.

Test; CO2 Scrubbing CO2 scrubbing is an essential and intrinsic part of the HRC. The scrubbing must be able to perform to the required level from totally autonomous power and consumable. The test aims at establishing firstly if the scrubbing can be effective and secondly the approximate life cycle of the scrubbing consumable without change. A 50 litre bottle of CO2, purity certificate enclosed and with initial weight of 87.33 kg, was used to inject CO2

into the chamber at a rate simulating 9 divers in saturation breathing CO2 into atmosphere at 490 ml per minute each, therefore a total injection value of 4410 ml/pm. Scrubbing was performed using two Weng Huat CCU units, each containing 9.2 kg (two canisters of 4.6 kg each) of soda lime. An additional scrubber, namely a jhem 10 kg unit provides emergency additional coverage to take into consideration a full compliment of divers. With the 18.4 kg in the Weng Huat CCU’s and a further 10 kg in the jhem scrubber a total of 28.4 kg of soda lime was used. CO2

injected directly into the vessel

does create the possibility for higher ‘spot’ concentrations. Efforts were made to ensure that this was

reduced. Effective scrubbing lasted for 4 hours and 45 minutes maintaining the atmosphere below 1000 ppm. With a CO2 weight reduction over that period of of 3.2 kg on the cylinder, this is consistent with the 1592 litres used for the test of which 1256 (average 4.41 lpm) liters were within the range (2.48 kg). (NB: 1 litre of CO2 weighs approx 1.98g) The absorbent onboard included;

Two Weng Huat CCU’s containing 9.2 Kg each = 18.4 kg One jhem Scrubber unit containing 10 kg 10 kg Total soda lime – 28.4 kg

A Member of IMCA


Page 20 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Test; Humidity Control The chamber, as supported by the main system control unit should be capable of supporting humidity. The emergency life support control unit has two supplies, namely primary and secondary. (Note: that

the HW supply was not fitted at the time of the test – the trial was completed using alternative

support). This should enable humidity to be controlled however when attempting to raise or lower the humidity within the HRC, the precision of controls has to be effective which was not proven on the trial. Test 1 – The test for hypothermia is generally performed in cool climates. Performing such a test in warm conditions does not fully allow for actual considerations such as overcoming the ambient cooling conditions imposed on the overall system. In an attempt at ensuring that the test does have some meaning, the ambient temperature was taken as the starting point and by supplying only heat as estimated to two divers, i.e. 300 Watts as input, additional heat was added via the system heating circuit, in this case, the primary circuit. The test for hypothermia was performed against an ambient external temperature of circa 29°C. The internal temperature was brought up from 31.27°C to 34.89°C in 1 hour and 34 minutes using heated water from a 12 kW supply, pumped at 4.5 bar and 17 lpm with water temperature recorded as rising from 29 to 37.6°C. The test was able to prove that substantial capacity does exist and that under the circumstances of the test, the internal environment would heat up quite rapidly. Under genuine cooling conditions, the speed of heating would no doubt be lesser however personnel would or should be protected by thermal gear which itself would further reduce the speed of heat build. The capacity was not tested for its maximum extent as it would have required a heat removal source of known capacity or conditions that would have allowed a failure point of the equipment to be achieved. The equipment proved positively able to rise the internal temperature well within its operational range. Test 2 & 3 These two tests were performed as one. This was the Summer and Tropical heat test that essentially ensures that a full complement of personnel, all emitting 200 Watts of heat energy each could be controlled at and below the thermal target. The heat input was set to represent 9 divers in saturation under "Hyperthermia" conditions therefore emitting 1.8 kW. During this and subsequent tests, CO2 testing was also continuing, adding exothermic heat. Fans and lights were all on, again adding heat, all of which added to the functionality of the test. Chilling was initiated and continued for a period in excess of ninety minutes. Under similar conditions, the continuation tests proved the ability to make minor adjustments to the temperature, the machinery was held running (and note that while chilling was not required such as on tests 1 & 5) the chiller was continued on closed circuit in order to ensure equipment reliability was tested to the full 24 hours. The test proved that there remains considerable flexibility and controllability. Test 4 to establish the maximum cooling. Heat input was increased by increments of 400 Watts with a hold between successive increases from the initial input of 1.8 kW to a total of 2.6 kW, during which time no upward temperature changes were observed. Even with an additional 800 Watts of heat input, the average was still reducing and would naturally maintain once the system reached its pre-set level. At no time did the chilling unit lose control.

A Member of IMCA


Page 21 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Test 5 to establish a safe time given total failure of surface support. The figures are all available however for the sake of producing a value at which a risk assessment may be based, the following tabulated listing has been provided. The test requires a time count for 1ºC. This was done over a range of 5 ºC and the average is the mean. The first test proved to be flawed with inconsistent data collected. The test was repeated with better and more understandable data collected. !st Test (5) at start of thermal trial 2nd Test (5) at end of thermal trial

Temp Deg C Time Temp Deg C Time

27.85 09:48 28.92 06:58

28.85 10:01 29.91 07:01

29.85 10:55 30.93 07:09 31.92 07:26

32.92 07:52 Mean Time per Deg C 19 mins Mean Time per Deg C 10.8 mins

The results - The initial heat rise is rapidly tempered to a slowing but never the less exponential rise and conservatively given the data above, a rise of 1°C in 10.8 minutes would be a good stating point for any risk assessment considering that the unit would under normal conditions be maintained in chilled conditions, therefore assuming an HRC holding temperature of 27°C (for example), the safe time available (as per the NPD upper physiological limit of 35°C) would be approximately 1 hours and 44 minutes.

A Member of IMCA


Page 22 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

6.0 DATA GRAPHS AND PROVEN POINTS

Data was collected electronically with that data supplied in EXCEL format on the disk that accompanies this report. The data has however been broken down and displayed in graph form that demonstrate the various effects and tests. Two blocks of data were collected, namely the base line and the thermal trial. From the data, specific elements were taken and are displayed in the following pages. Base line tests clearly demonstrate a number of very important findings, namely the effectiveness of the insulated pressure hull and the ineffectiveness of the same hull where it is not insulated. Clear separation was observed between the internal and external environments. The thermal trial tests were carried out to demonstrate the ability of the machinery to cope with life support over a sustained period of time. Machinery efficiency was tested as were extreme parameters such as excessive heat input, used to put additional load on the chilling capacity. All tests are clearly notable on the graphs shown below with the data being taken directly from the automatic logging data stream. All tests proved satisfactory to the aims of the protocol. Brief observations are added to the graphs that point out some of the findings. It is however noted that the tests, other than the base line, were conducted using the designated life support package (flyaway) package. The word ‘autonomous’ life support being interpreted as meaning ‘other than the support from the main system’. Life support as exists purely on the vessel only includes battery for lights and scrubber and gas for O2 injection and HeO2 make up. Heat build up could not be countered without external support and is a fundamental reasoning for test No. 5 described above and graphically shown below. Graphs as follow; GR1 Overall Base Line Data

GR2 Controlled Events – Thermal Trial GR3 Supply line activity during thermal trial GR4 Controlled Events and Transmittance

GR5 Thermal layering and mixing during trial GR6 Heat input during mechanical trials

GR7 CO2 in atmosphere vs allowable

A Member of IMCA


Page 23 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Overall Base Line Data GR1

Base Line Test - EIS 200 msw SAT 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

10:4

3:55_

_03-

09-2

008

17:3

5:01_

_03-

09-2

008

18:2

3:51_

_03-

09-2

008

19:1

2:41_

_03-

09-2

008

20:0

1:31_

_03-

09-2

008

20:5

0:21_

_03-

09-2

008

21:3

9:11_

_03-

09-2

008

22:2

8:01_

_03-

09-2

008

23:1

6:51_

_03-

09-2

008

00:0

5:41_

_04-

09-2

008

00:5

4:31_

_04-

09-2

008

01:4

3:21_

_04-

09-2

008

02:3

2:11_

_04-

09-2

008

03:2

1:02_

_04-

09-2

008

04:0

9:52_

_04-

09-2

008

04:5

8:42_

_04-

09-2

008

05:4

7:32_

_04-

09-2

008

06:3

6:22_

_04-

09-2

008

07:2

5:12_

_04-

09-2

008

08:4

7:58_

_04-

09-2

008

16:5

0:37_

_04-

09-2

008

17:3

9:28_

_04-

09-2

008

18:2

8:18_

_04-

09-2

008

19:1

7:08_

_04-

09-2

008

20:0

5:58_

_04-

09-2

008

20:5

4:48_

_04-

09-2

008

21:4

3:38_

_04-

09-2

008

22:3

2:28_

_04-

09-2

008

23:2

1:18_

_04-

09-2

008

00:1

0:08_

_05-

09-2

008

00:5

8:58_

_05-

09-2

008

01:4

7:48_

_05-

09-2

008

02:3

6:39_

_05-

09-2

008

03:2

5:29_

_05-

09-2

008

04:1

4:19_

_05-

09-2

008

05:0

3:09_

_05-

09-2

008

05:5

1:59_

_05-

09-2

008

06:4

0:49_

_05-

09-2

008

07:2

9:39_

_05-

09-2

008

08:1

8:30_

_05-

09-2

008

Date and Time

Tem

pera

ture

Deg

C

Internal Temperature

External Ambient

Points of Note: The baseline test performed over a period of 24 hours proved to have a good degree of protection provided from the external conditions.

The external to internal comparison clearly indicate a degree of thermal protection Very limited shadowing was noted.

A Member of IMCA


Page 24 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Controlled Events – Thermal Trial GR2

Controlled Events - Thermal Trial on EIS 200 msw SAT 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

08:4

3:20_

_05-

09-2

008

09:2

3:35_

_05-

09-2

008

10:0

7:04_

_05-

09-2

008

10:5

2:31_

_05-

09-2

008

11:3

4:17_

_05-

09-2

008

12:1

7:17_

_05-

09-2

008

12:5

7:33_

_05-

09-2

008

13:4

0:09_

_05-

09-2

008

14:2

0:24_

_05-

09-2

008

15:0

0:39_

_05-

09-2

008

15:4

0:55_

_05-

09-2

008

16:2

1:09_

_05-

09-2

008

17:0

1:26_

_05-

09-2

008

17:4

1:40_

_05-

09-2

008

18:2

1:55_

_05-

09-2

008

19:0

2:10_

_05-

09-2

008

19:4

2:25_

_05-

09-2

008

20:2

2:40_

_05-

09-2

008

21:0

2:55_

_05-

09-2

008

21:4

3:10_

_05-

09-2

008

22:2

3:25_

_05-

09-2

008

23:0

3:40_

_05-

09-2

008

23:4

3:55_

_05-

09-2

008

00:2

4:10_

_06-

09-2

008

01:0

4:25_

_06-

09-2

008

01:4

4:40_

_06-

09-2

008

02:2

4:55_

_06-

09-2

008

03:0

5:10_

_06-

09-2

008

03:4

5:25_

_06-

09-2

008

04:2

5:40_

_06-

09-2

008

05:0

5:54_

_06-

09-2

008

05:4

6:09_

_06-

09-2

008

06:2

6:24_

_06-

09-2

008

07:0

6:39_

_06-

09-2

008

07:4

6:54_

_06-

09-2

008

08:2

7:09_

_06-

09-2

008

Date and Time

Tem

pe

ratu

re D

eg

C

External Ambient

Temp

Internal Ambient

Temperature

Event Markers

Points of note: There remained virtually no difference between the steel temperature externally and internally, indicating that the steel boundary affords no protection The temperature range was about 4ºC and variant maximum at 1ºC

A Member of IMCA


Page 25 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Supply line activity during thermal trial GR3

Water Pipe Activity - Thermal Trial on EIS 200 msw SAT 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

08:4

3:20_

_05-

09-2

008

09:2

2:47_

_05-

09-2

008

10:0

5:27_

_05-

09-2

008

10:5

0:06_

_05-

09-2

008

11:3

1:03_

_05-

09-2

008

12:1

3:16_

_05-

09-2

008

12:5

2:43_

_05-

09-2

008

13:3

4:30_

_05-

09-2

008

14:1

3:58_

_05-

09-2

008

14:5

3:24_

_05-

09-2

008

15:3

2:51_

_05-

09-2

008

16:1

2:18_

_05-

09-2

008

16:5

1:45_

_05-

09-2

008

17:3

1:13_

_05-

09-2

008

18:1

0:39_

_05-

09-2

008

18:5

0:06_

_05-

09-2

008

19:2

9:32_

_05-

09-2

008

20:0

8:59_

_05-

09-2

008

20:4

8:26_

_05-

09-2

008

21:2

7:52_

_05-

09-2

008

22:0

7:19_

_05-

09-2

008

22:4

6:46_

_05-

09-2

008

23:2

6:13_

_05-

09-2

008

00:0

5:39_

_06-

09-2

008

00:4

5:06_

_06-

09-2

008

01:2

4:33_

_06-

09-2

008

02:0

3:59_

_06-

09-2

008

02:4

3:26_

_06-

09-2

008

03:2

2:52_

_06-

09-2

008

04:0

2:19_

_06-

09-2

008

04:4

1:46_

_06-

09-2

008

05:2

1:12_

_06-

09-2

008

06:0

0:39_

_06-

09-2

008

06:4

0:05_

_06-

09-2

008

07:1

9:32_

_06-

09-2

008

07:5

8:58_

_06-

09-2

008

Date and Time

Tem

pera

ture

Deg

C

Event Markers

Primary In - Internal

Primary Out - Internal

Primary in - External

Primary out - External

Points of note: Tests for Winter, Summer and Tropical conditions plus equipment failure were all performed in accordance with IMCA D02/06 guidance note CO2 was injected and scrubbed during chilling tests. Any additional heat from exothermic reaction was effectively tested * Tests carried out while all scrubber, exchanger blower fans and lights were working drawing a total of 7.84 amps *Additional scrubbing tests were carried out which extended beyond the limits of the graph above.

A Member of IMCA


Page 26 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Controlled Events and Transmittance GR4

Heat Transfer (through wall & insulation) - Thermal Trial on EIS 200 msw SAT 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

08:4

3:20_

_05-

09-2

008

09:2

2:47_

_05-

09-2

008

10:0

5:27_

_05-

09-2

008

10:5

0:06_

_05-

09-2

008

11:3

1:03_

_05-

09-2

008

12:1

3:16_

_05-

09-2

008

12:5

2:43_

_05-

09-2

008

13:3

4:30_

_05-

09-2

008

14:1

3:58_

_05-

09-2

008

14:5

3:24_

_05-

09-2

008

15:3

2:51_

_05-

09-2

008

16:1

2:18_

_05-

09-2

008

16:5

1:45_

_05-

09-2

008

17:3

1:13_

_05-

09-2

008

18:1

0:39_

_05-

09-2

008

18:5

0:06_

_05-

09-2

008

19:2

9:32_

_05-

09-2

008

20:0

8:59_

_05-

09-2

008

20:4

8:26_

_05-

09-2

008

21:2

7:52_

_05-

09-2

008

22:0

7:19_

_05-

09-2

008

22:4

6:46_

_05-

09-2

008

23:2

6:13_

_05-

09-2

008

00:0

5:39_

_06-

09-2

008

00:4

5:06_

_06-

09-2

008

01:2

4:33_

_06-

09-2

008

02:0

3:59_

_06-

09-2

008

02:4

3:26_

_06-

09-2

008

03:2

2:52_

_06-

09-2

008

04:0

2:19_

_06-

09-2

008

04:4

1:46_

_06-

09-2

008

05:2

1:12_

_06-

09-2

008

06:0

0:39_

_06-

09-2

008

06:4

0:05_

_06-

09-2

008

07:1

9:32_

_06-

09-2

008

07:5

8:58_

_06-

09-2

008

Date and Time

Te

mp

era

ture

Deg

C

Event Markers

Average External

TempExternal Insulation

External Hull

Internal Hull

Average Internal

Temp

Points of note: Test events showed significant internal movement mostly matched by the transmittance through the hull but had not effect on the external insulation

A Member of IMCA


Page 27 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Thermal layering and mixing during trial GR5

Thermal Mixing - Thermal Trial on EIS 200 msw SAT 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

08:4

3:20_

_05-

09-2

008

09:2

3:35_

_05-

09-2

008

10:0

7:04_

_05-

09-2

008

10:5

2:31_

_05-

09-2

008

11:3

4:17_

_05-

09-2

008

12:1

7:17_

_05-

09-2

008

12:5

7:33_

_05-

09-2

008

13:4

0:09_

_05-

09-2

008

14:2

0:24_

_05-

09-2

008

15:0

0:39_

_05-

09-2

008

15:4

0:55_

_05-

09-2

008

16:2

1:09_

_05-

09-2

008

17:0

1:26_

_05-

09-2

008

17:4

1:40_

_05-

09-2

008

18:2

1:55_

_05-

09-2

008

19:0

2:10_

_05-

09-2

008

19:4

2:25_

_05-

09-2

008

20:2

2:40_

_05-

09-2

008

21:0

2:55_

_05-

09-2

008

21:4

3:10_

_05-

09-2

008

22:2

3:25_

_05-

09-2

008

23:0

3:40_

_05-

09-2

008

23:4

3:55_

_05-

09-2

008

00:2

4:10_

_06-

09-2

008

01:0

4:25_

_06-

09-2

008

01:4

4:40_

_06-

09-2

008

02:2

4:55_

_06-

09-2

008

03:0

5:10_

_06-

09-2

008

03:4

5:25_

_06-

09-2

008

04:2

5:40_

_06-

09-2

008

05:0

5:54_

_06-

09-2

008

05:4

6:09_

_06-

09-2

008

06:2

6:24_

_06-

09-2

008

07:0

6:39_

_06-

09-2

008

07:4

6:54_

_06-

09-2

008

08:2

7:09_

_06-

09-2

008

Date and Time

Tem

pera

ture

Deg

C

Event Markers

Internal - at top

Internal - at middle

Internal - at bottom

Internal - Near End

Internal - mid section

Internal - Far End

Points of note: With the exception of when all machinery items (including circulation fans) were off, the thermal mixing was almost total The average separation was only 1ºC

A Member of IMCA


Page 28 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Heat input during mechanical trial GR6

Heat Input - Thermal Trial on EIS 200 msw SAT 1

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

08:4

3:20_

_05-

09-2

008

09:2

3:19_

_05-

09-2

008

10:0

6:32_

_05-

09-2

008

10:5

1:43_

_05-

09-2

008

11:3

3:12_

_05-

09-2

008

12:1

5:57_

_05-

09-2

008

12:5

5:56_

_05-

09-2

008

13:3

8:16_

_05-

09-2

008

14:1

8:15_

_05-

09-2

008

14:5

8:15_

_05-

09-2

008

15:3

8:13_

_05-

09-2

008

16:1

8:12_

_05-

09-2

008

16:5

8:12_

_05-

09-2

008

17:3

8:11_

_05-

09-2

008

18:1

8:10_

_05-

09-2

008

18:5

8:09_

_05-

09-2

008

19:3

8:08_

_05-

09-2

008

20:1

8:06_

_05-

09-2

008

20:5

8:05_

_05-

09-2

008

21:3

8:04_

_05-

09-2

008

22:1

8:03_

_05-

09-2

008

22:5

8:02_

_05-

09-2

008

23:3

8:01_

_05-

09-2

008

00:1

8:00_

_06-

09-2

008

00:5

7:59_

_06-

09-2

008

01:3

7:57_

_06-

09-2

008

02:1

7:56_

_06-

09-2

008

02:5

7:55_

_06-

09-2

008

03:3

7:54_

_06-

09-2

008

04:1

7:53_

_06-

09-2

008

04:5

7:51_

_06-

09-2

008

05:3

7:50_

_06-

09-2

008

06:1

7:49_

_06-

09-2

008

06:5

7:48_

_06-

09-2

008

07:3

7:47_

_06-

09-2

008

Date and Time

Tem

pera

ture

Deg

C

Event Markers

Heat Input

Proven Point

As noted in the baseline test, the heat transmittance was effectively prevented by the thermal protection.

A Member of IMCA


Page 29 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

CO2 in atmosphere vs allowable GR7

CO2 in Atmosphere- Environmental Trial on EIS 200 msw SAT 1

0.00

200.00

400.00

600.00

800.00

1000.00

1200.00

1400.00

10:5

1:59_

_05-

09-2

008

11:0

4:36_

_05-

09-2

008

11:1

7:13_

_05-

09-2

008

11:3

1:19_

_05-

09-2

008

11:4

3:56_

_05-

09-2

008

11:5

9:18_

_05-

09-2

008

12:1

1:55_

_05-

09-2

008

12:2

4:32_

_05-

09-2

008

12:3

7:09_

_05-

09-2

008

12:4

9:45_

_05-

09-2

008

13:0

2:22_

_05-

09-2

008

13:1

7:20_

_05-

09-2

008

13:2

9:56_

_05-

09-2

008

13:4

2:34_

_05-

09-2

008

13:5

5:10_

_05-

09-2

008

14:0

7:47_

_05-

09-2

008

14:2

0:24_

_05-

09-2

008

14:3

3:01_

_05-

09-2

008

14:4

5:37_

_05-

09-2

008

14:5

8:15_

_05-

09-2

008

15:1

0:51_

_05-

09-2

008

15:2

3:28_

_05-

09-2

008

15:3

6:05_

_05-

09-2

008

15:4

8:41_

_05-

09-2

008

16:0

1:18_

_05-

09-2

008

16:1

3:55_

_05-

09-2

008

16:2

6:31_

_05-

09-2

008

16:3

9:09_

_05-

09-2

008

16:5

1:45_

_05-

09-2

008

17:0

4:23_

_05-

09-2

008

17:1

6:59_

_05-

09-2

008

17:2

9:36_

_05-

09-2

008

17:4

2:13_

_05-

09-2

008

17:5

4:49_

_05-

09-2

008

18:0

7:26_

_05-

09-2

008

Date and Time

Te

mp

era

ture

Deg

C

CO2 in Atmosphere

Allow able CO2 in

Atmosphere

Proven Point

Heat was input into the lock as per the requirements of IMCA For Hyperthermic situations at 200 Watts per diver i.e. 12 divers = 2.4 kW except for period of testing under test 4 for equipment failure point and test 1 (Hypothermia) For Hypothermic situation at 150 Watts per diver i.e. 2 divers = 300 Watts

A Member of IMCA


Page 30 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

7.0 THERMAL CALCULATIONS: 7.1 Theoretical calculation In the calculation that follows some estimates and assumptions have been included as the actual material properties were not available. From the result of the calculations, is can be seen that the transmittance is approximately fourteen times greater through the steel then through the close cell material. This does not however take into account the areas of exposed metal and pipe work that has direct conduction of heat that will directly reduce the effectiveness of the insulation. Using the following formula 1/K = 1/a1+w/λ+1/ a1 Where K = the overall heat transfer coefficient (W/m2/K)

λ = the wall thermal conductivity (W/mK) a1 and a2= the respective individual heat transfer coefficients (W/m2/K) w = wall thickness of the material (mm)

For the purpose of assumption, the thermal conductivity – k – is assumed as follows; Carbon Steel 20 W/ m2K Air 50 W/m2K HeO2 100 W/m2K Close cell foam 0.5 W/m2K (estimated value)

Carbon Steel Closed cell foam Q

T1

T2

T3

a1

W1 W2

a2

Tw1

Tw2

Tw3

a3

A Member of IMCA


Page 31 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

First Medium Steel a1 = 100 W/m2K a2 = 0.5 W/ m2K w1 = 30 mm (estimated) λ = 20 W/ m2K Result 1/K = 1/100+30*10-3/20+1/0.5 = 0.01+0.0015+2 = 2.0115 Second Medium Armaflex Class 1 Closed Cell Foam Insulation a2 = 20 W/m2K a3 = 50 W/ m2K w2 = 25 mm λ = 0.5 W/ m2K Result 1/K = 1/20+25*10-3/0.5+1/50 = 0.05+0.1+0.02 = 0.141 Note: The effectiveness of the closed cell insulation is clearly and substantially greater than that of the steel.

The magnitude of the difference is however difficult to prove in all circumstances.

A Member of IMCA


Page 32 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

7.2 Consequences Number of exposure garments required in the chamber:- Three in cold climates Maximum heating capacity available to the chamber: Sufficient for two divers Chamber cooling required for maximum no. of divers : 9 Divers at 200 W each = 1800 W Estimated maximum cooling required: 1.8 kW (in excess of) Estimated reserve cooling available: 0.8 kW Chamber heating required for minimum no of divers 2 Divers at 150 W each = 300 W The chamber thermometer is accurate to ± 1C: Not tested The chamber thermometer reads to ± 1C: Not tested Scrubber life: maximum number of divers: Actual life at 490 ml per diver = 5h 47m (Based on initial fill)

Soda sorb can be replaced by the divers: The medical lock is suitably sized to fit the

soda sorb canisters in and therefore allow for change as necessary.

7.3 Observations The written procedures on board are: Chamber temperature control: Required Scrubber soda sorb replacement: Required Compressor – drive, cut out, water air cooling: All function well Glycol pump: Glycol pumps functioned well during test Sea-water suction pump: Not available for test Control Controllable except for humidity

A Member of IMCA


Page 33 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

7.4 Possible Environmental Conditions Dive site climatic extremes: Tropical extreme temperature 50ºC Tropical extreme water temperature 35ºC Winter extreme ambient low air Not provisioned for cold water work Water Not provisioned for cold water work RH Ext. 50 – 90 % estimated Wind 0 – 16 m/s anticipated Solar load Limited effect – shading advised

7.5 Target Temperatures All target temperatures were established to be within the Chamber Temperature Limits against depth

(Norwegian Petroleum Directorate) as shown on the table below

A Member of IMCA


Page 34 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

8.0 CONCLUSION

The results for each of the applied tests proved positive*. The HRC while connected to the flyaway package should be able to function well provided it is supported by suitably qualified personnel and that full consideration is given to the connecting of the HRC to the support package. The unit was tested for cooling against a heat load representing a full compliment of personnel. The unit was also tested for heating against a lesser load however this test has reservations in the results. CO2 scrubbing proved to be effective against a full compliment of divers however the artificial limit as set by the protocol was reached at 3 hours and 20 minutes. Humidity control may be possible but would require a level of controllability not given at the time of the test. The test protocol is limited to the functioning of the machinery and the intrinsic ability of the unit. The results contained within this report may be used in support of risk management and project safety planning when associated with all other considerations. This procedure did prove the ability of the insulation. It also proved that the stored heat or lack of heat is a substantial factor to consider with respect to control and sustainability of life support prior to coupling to a support package. The properties of the thermal lagging under normal circumstances also have the paradoxical effect of preventing heat escaping through the vessel wall should it be floating in water or sprayed with water for cooling The life support package was proven to be able to provide heating and cooling control. Instructional documentation is needed, and particular attention is recommended to ensure that emergency personnel are familiar with this seldom used equipment. Standard load out items were not considered under the scope of this document. The test (test 5) for rise in temperature against input heat without cooling was performed three times. Using conservative mean average figures for project planning, it could be assumed that 10.8 minutes to rise each 1°C if a full compliment of personnel are located onboard however this does not take into account the exponential slow down as the internal temperature rises against the given heat input.

*The positive results on the scrubbing was achieved following the placement of an additional scrubber

**Autonomous is taken to mean ‘remote from the main life support’. Testing has included a life support

package as remote from the main system, without which the results herein would not have been achieved.

A Member of IMCA


KBA a Total Quality Management Company This report is granted or issued subject to the condition that it is understood and agreed that nothing herein shall be deemed to relieve any designer, manufacturer, seller, repairer or operator of any warranty, express or implied and KB Associates Pte Ltd liability shall be limited to the acts of its employees, agents and subcontractors. Under no circumstance whatsoever shall KB Associates Pte Ltd be liable for any injury or damage to any person or property occurring by reason of negligent operation, misuse of or any defect in materials, machinery, equipment or other items other than defects actually inspected by KB Associates Pte Ltd and ascertainable by normally accepted testing standards, or defects reflected in documents reviewed by KB Associates Pte Ltd and which are covered by this certificate or report.

Page 35 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

This report has been complied using information available and gathered from site. Every effort has been made to capture essential and accurate information and to present it clearly. The information has also been presented to allow the user of this document to draw conclusions by reference to the data enclosed. Signed Date :- 29th September 2008 Brendan Kearns Director KB Associates Pte Ltd Checked and verified by Date :- 30th September 2008 Darren Brunton CMIOSH

Director KB Associates Pte Ltd

A Member of IMCA


Page 36 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

APPENDIX 1 - INSTRUMENTS LIST & CERTIFICATION

This appendix contains copies of equipment used for the verification and testing process of the environmental testing project All test instruments were confirmed for accuracy on June 4th 2008 against a single unit under calibration from 20th December 2007. Model 8340-M-GB, S/N 02080487. This unit was tested by a third party. The certificate is attached here in. Also attached are the statements of calibration as supplied by the various manufacturers of the equipment on the purchase date as stated on the certificate. Equipment used to perform the tests included:-

• Neurode Rht Data Logger, Model 8180-2002

• DataLogger Software v 1.0.0.2

• RhT sensors, SHT1x/SHT7x,

• Humidity & Temperature sensor.

• K type thermocouples c/w PICO 8 distribution and balance blocks All incoming data was captured on the Neuortech software specially designed by KB Associates and transposed onto excel for necessary conversion to graphs and supplied original data. Accuracies of all test equipment is confirmed by comparison against an instrument calibrated to National Standards for temperature, humidity and air velocity. Other equipment was used including the four heater elements that provide up to 10 kW of heat in an evenly dispersed manner. Heat input was controlled using a wattage controller, in turn set to the limit as required, based on the supplied voltage and applying OEIS law calculation. An independent unit that monitors both the temperature and humidity was set inside to confirm readings obtained on the automatic logging device. CO2 was injected using a calibrated Digital flow meter via a high volume reducer. Both the pressure and weight of the bottle were compared in order to confirm the gas used

A Member of IMCA


Page 37 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

AIR VELOCITY, TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY METER Note: all test instruments were confirmed against calibrated instruments with certification below

A Member of IMCA


Page 38 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 39 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 40 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 41 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

Probe No. Item S/N Test 1 Actual Temp Test 2 Actual Temp

Control Temp Degreese C Control Temp Degreese C

1 PICO - A JAL65/021 26.75 26.61 61.61 62.04

2 26.47 26.33 54.1 54.44

3 26.16 26.34 36.25 36.76

4 25.95 26.23 36.52 36.84

5 26.81 26.4 49.02 50.34

6 26.19 26.37 46.12 46.98

7 26.17 26.34 45.1 44.47

8 26.3 26.31 45.13 44.94

1 PICO - B HJL29/288 25.96 25.47 42.54 42.38

2 26.06 26.25 44.12 44.15

3 25.93 26.01 74.38 74.9

4 25.72 25.94 60.74 61.01

5 26.59 26.24 66.43 66.74

6 25.82 25.97 42.25 42.7

7 26.11 26.28 39.89 39.65

8 26.08 26.16 37.1 36.93

1 PICO - C JAL65/008 27.07 26.87 112.98 113.33

2 27.06 26.93 117.76 117.5

3 26.09 26.38 85.85 85.9

4 25.82 25.8 68.32 68.88

5 25.83 25.7 43.51 44.64

6 27 26.28 42.22 42.35

7 27.15 27.29 43.45 43.61

8 27.01 27.09 38.5 38.59

1 RHT - 2 1 34 26.23 26.01 32.28 32.61

2 2 35 26.22 32.18

3 3 33 26.21 31.24

4 4 5 26.53 32.12

5 5 11 27.77 32.26

6 6 13 27.1 32.15

7 7 12 26.74 32.26

8 8 28 26.83 32.24

9 9 22 26.65 31.32

10 10 34 26.43 32.61

11 11 35 26.38 32.28

12 12 33 26.26 31.24

13 13 5 26.13 32.26

14 14 11 26.29 32.26

15 15 13 26.44 32.15

16 16 12 26.35 32.25

17 17 28 26.46 32.21

18 18 22 26.65 31.19

Test carried out by: Julian Portelli Date of test : 28th May 2008

Test witnessed by : Brendan Kearns

A Member of IMCA


Page 42 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

AUTOMATIC DATA LOGGER

A Member of IMCA


Page 43 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY SENSORS

A Member of IMCA


Page 44 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 45 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 46 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 47 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 48 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

CO2 CALIBRATED DIGITAL FLOW METER

A Member of IMCA


Page 49 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

HEAT INPUT ELEMENTS AND CONTROL

Reach Electrical Delivery Order Form

6 PC REO/250

Elstein Reflector SZ: 250X95.5X31MM(H)

6 PC FSR 100W 230V

Elstein 245X60MM Infrared ELE

6 PC 2-1602-2(16A)

Porcelain Connector 2-Poles 450v 6mm SQ.

10mm SQ

Fix to Reflector Body

1 PC AZ-8859

Mini Gun Type IR Laser Thermometer

Range: -20 to 420C

1 LOT Reach

Additional Supply

*2 Set of Cable With

Plug & Socket Mounted To Existing Box Peform Resistance Test With 240V & 110V

Verification of Conformity

This is to certify that the equipment comprising 4 x PR 11 H000 6 x 1 kW heater elements and one SSR-40 VAC 500 k wattage controller was confirmed against our calibrated instruments to an accuracy of ± 2 VAC and 0.01 amps

10 kW heater c/w control unit

Unit tested on 26th June 2008

51 Ubi Avenue 1

#03-05 Paya Ubi Ind Park

Singapore 408933

Reach Electrical

Number KB-HE4-001

Expires 26th June 2009

Attending Supervisor : Ling Ah Ling

A Member of IMCA


Page 50 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 51 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

ELECTRICAL CALCULATIONS Ohms law Resistance = R Voltage = V Amperage = I Wattage = W W = V x I R (Ohm) = V2/W R = 230 x 230 (52900) / 1000 = 52.9 Per unit (heater element) calculation and example Voltage available = 230 VAC W = V2 (230 VAC) / 52.9 = 1000 Watts (Max capacity with supplied voltage) W = V2 (210 VAC) / 52.9 = 834 Watts (Max capacity with supplied voltage) I = W/V Therefore assume 834 Watts / 210 Volts = 3.97 Amps (per heater) x 6 (example if 6 units used) = 23.82 Amps required – (assume 4 heaters) – 2.3 kW Therefore 2300 W / 208 Volts (assumed voltage and may/will differ) = 11.06 (2.76 each of four)

A Member of IMCA


Page 52 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

JHEM SCRUBBER Installed prior to test – temp position for test and to be finalised in close proximity for actual use.

A Member of IMCA


Page 53 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

VISI FLOAT DWYER FLUID FLOW METER

A Member of IMCA


Page 54 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

VISI FLOAT DWYER GAS FLOW METER Air flow meter compensated for CO2

A Member of IMCA


Page 55 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

APPENDIX 2 - VESSEL INSULATION DETAILS

This appendix contains copies of; Armaflex Class 1, 25mm closed cell foam insulation. Note: in the absence of alternative information, it has been assumed that Armaflex closed cell foam

insulation has been used on this vessel.

A Member of IMCA


Page 56 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 57 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 58 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 59 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

A Member of IMCA


Page 60 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

APPENDIX 3 LOCATION OF PROBES

Cross Section / Side View

��

��

Date :September 2008

Probe Locations

EIS-HRC-PC501-08

EIS 200 MSW

Primary In Primary Out

Thermal Insulation 25mm Armacell Class I Armatlex

A Member of IMCA


Page 61 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

heat e

xchanger b

lower

CCU 2

CCU 1

Cross Section/ Top View

Cross Section/ Side View

2.1m/s

2.0m/s

1.8m/s

1.1 m/s

1.2 m/s

Jhemscrubber1.8 m/sdownwards

Blower

CCU

2.0 m/s

0.8 m/s

1.8 m/s

Avg

CCU

0.8 m/s

Scrubber

0.4 m/s

Date :September 2008

Internal Fan Action

EIS-HRC-PC501-08

EIS 200 MSW

A Member of IMCA


Page 62 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

2 x CCU c/w 3 x 0.23 amp fans ea 2 x suction fans

at 0.23 amps each 1 x blower fan

At 0.23 amp all Ø145mm

1 x CCU c/w 3 x 0.23 amp fans 3 x blower fans @ 0.23 amps each Contains water filled pipes (chilled water) for heat exchange purpose.

A Member of IMCA


Page 63 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

50mm

10mm

80mmØ

100mmØ

Papst 0.8amp fan

350mm

Ø250mm

200mm

2 x Chamber Lights

Date: September 2008

Electrical Usage CCU @0.69amp each Blower @0.69 amp each Lights @1 amp each Scrubber @0.8 each Total = 4.87 amp

1 x Emergency Scrubber

EIS-HRC-PC501-08

EIS 200 MSW

A Member of IMCA


Page 64 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

APPENDIX 4 - PHOTOGRAPHS

The photographs contained herein shall remain the sole property of EIS Offshore Services Pte Ltd and may not be distributed without prior written consent from the owner .

A Member of IMCA


Page 65 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

VESSEL NAME PLATE HRC PRESSURE VESSEL MEDICAL/FOOD LOCK INT. VESSEL LAUNCHING SYSTEM

CCU CANISTER EMPTY WEIGHT CCU CANISTER FULL WEIGHT INTERNAL EXCHANGER /

BLOWER UNIT

INTERNAL CHAMBER

CONDITIONING UNITS (CCU) X 2

A Member of IMCA


Page 66 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

INTERNAL LIGHT INTERNAL DEPTH GAUGE INTERNAL BIBS DUMP BPR INTERNAL GAS FLOW PANEL

INTERNAL ELECTRIC CONTROL

& COMMS BOX

VIEW PORT SHOWING ID

NUMBERS ON SEALING FACE

INTERNAL PIPEWORK INTERNAL MEDICAL LOCK DOOR

A Member of IMCA


Page 67 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

EMERGENCY ‘FLYAWAY’ LIFE

SUPPORT PACKAGE

FLYAWAY GAS/WATER

PENETRATOR PANEL

FLYAWAY LIFE SUPPORT

CONTROL PENETRATOR PANEL

FLYAWAY SINGLE SPLIT AIR

CONDITIONING UNIT

FLYAWAY LIFE SUPPORT

PANEL

DEPTH MONITORING GAS CONTROL & INDICATION

GAUGES

COMMUNICATIONS AND

ENVIRONMENT MONITORING

A Member of IMCA


Page 68 of 68

PROJ/016/06-04 RC:200205925W

SINGLE SPLIT BLOWER UNIT LIGHTS AND FITTINGS EXTERNAL LIFTING POINTS EXTERNAL ELECTRICAL INLET

5 HP CHILLER UNIT CHILLER UNIT CONTROL COMPRESSOR ELECTRIC MOTOR

BURKS PUMP ELECTIC BREAKERS METAL DECK CHILLER HEADER TANK

Documents

EIS HRC Test Report - PC501 - Chambers Oceanicss/SAT Brokers/EIS... · A Member of IMCA KB Associates Pte Ltd Project – P501 Report - EIS-HRC-PC501-08 Date – 3rd – 6 th September