What's titanium worth to you?

So the answer to can you stick weld it is --no not without incredibly expensive gear.

What you've never had you wont mis . Ille stick to Stainless.

Unless Carbon Monoxide from the exhaust is inert gas and I can stick weld in a bucket.

Yet im pretty sure my stick supplier wont have titanium rods. I have to drive miles to get 2 mm stainless 304 rods.

 

Fixed it.

 

Oh yeah,

Oops pmsl !

 

Can you compete with these guys?
http://www.alliedtitanium.com/

 

I think he is those guys.

OK, you brought up mil-spec as if that has a real world use.

Mil-spec is always overpriced, and often underperforms. Nuke storage? 1 my in the future?

OK to your titanium, 50% increased cost up front on the 'hope' the salesman did not sell me a bill of goods about the quality?

We know it does fail; we know it is more expensive to maintain; and we know important stainless steel fittings need to be inspected at around 10 years service; therefore, why would I want to spend the extra money up front?

It would be cheaper to place that money in an investment account, and in ten years replace all fittings without worrying about 'inspection costs.'

Which is what the military would normally do, if they were not driven by politics in most purchase decisions.

Having said that, you can sell to some. Some people think titanium is the cats meow. Sell to them. But, don't think you are going to open up a 'new market.'

That was in the 60's when everyone was going 'space age.' What worked is pretty much being used, what didn't seem necessary, is pretty much past tense.

IMHO.

YMMV.

Wayne

 

SandCrab,

As Wayne mentioned I work for Allied Titanium, so no I can't beat my own prices, but I compare very favorably.


Wayne,

There are a lot of stupid specs in Mil-Spec parts that have nothing to do with quality, and that does drive up prices a lot (there is a spec that in a box every screw must alternate which side of the box the screw head is on for instance). But there are also Mil-spec standards that dictate quality. They aren't all cut from the same cloth.

For many fittings the cost of titanium is actually less than 50%. Many of them it's more like 10-15% more. But the service life is much longer. There is no titanium part in normal service environments that should have a 10 year life, certainly not in the marine world. Assuming the part is physically damaged, there is no nominal service life, since it is non-corrosive. The Navy assumes 500 years for titanium parts (hull fittings), and engineers depending on design work with designed service life's of up to 100,000 years (nuclear storage tanks).

Realistically a titanium part in the marine environment should outlive the purchaser easily, unless it is placed in high temprature environments (in excess of 100C). Even at elevated tempratures is will far exceed the service life of stainless, or ther options. What this is worth is up to the consumer to decide, but if you assume you time as having any value then it likely is worth it.

As an example, we just replaced a drive shaft for a Beneteau 42, because the old one suffered from galvanic corrosion. To replace the shaft with a titanium one cost $50 more than to go with an aquamet shaft. Given the entire repair bill was over $1,000 the $50 was in the buyers mind money well spent. Since he will never have to replace the shaft again.

 

I used stainless bolts the other day that need to close a new design http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/21876/cat/500/ppuser/49990 Myark amphibious trailer tail gate with a rubber seal and need pressure to keep the water out..
They jammed well before full pressure applied on bolts and needed to hacksaw of.

I have worked on lng gas plants where I have screwed on and then welded 1” stainless pipe sockets that on some time I needed to repair sockets from other workers that had not been screwed inwards enough and failed x-rays, I grind weld off to undo sockets which jam every time when tried to undo.
What I did is fix the chain on my multi wrench invention http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3-EsetvqRg then place a meter pipe over the wrench then and force fed the threaded screw inwards because no way it would undo especially replacing a new socket.
There is no other wrench on the world market that could have done this.

 

1 my to 100 ty, wow. Titanium just got a much more realistic nuke expectancy.

Navy expects 100 year service life, again, mil-spec is not all it is cracked up to be.

15% more from the supplier to the retailer is 30 to 50% more to the end user.

Since a rig is recommended to be inspected after 10 years service in marine conditions, I would expect it would be easier to do it the way I explained above.

How would someone I sell a boat to know for certain all the titanium nuts and bolts were titanium if he did not do an inspection?

I maintained some vehicles in the Army, and I learned, if you do not inspect, you will have a failure. Sometimes, if you inspect, you will still have a failure, but at least you checked.

I do not see Titanium as a value added proposition.

Engineering says Titanium comes with its set of problems, sales people say it cures problems ....

Which is it?

 

Ti6Al4V Justifies Its Choice

The idea of using this alloy for a howitzer’s structural components was met with scepticism by some.
But titanium investment castings demonstrated their ability to meet tough criteria for weight reduction and overall ruggedness during numerous tests in the developmental phase, as well as in subsequent operational assessments.
the M777 achieved considerably more than a 900 ‘Mean rounds between system abort’ level of performance, exceeding the objective by a reassuring margin during tests. Moreover, it successfully completed a 20 year corrosion test, which called for the test gun to fire dozens of rounds after the corrosion testing had been completed.
Performance capabilities in a range of crucial combat support areas have also been greatly improved, such as a 25% increase in the ability to destroy enemy vehicles in close support combat, a 70% improvement in survivability, and a 500% increase in counter fire exchange ratios.
The lightness and compactness of the new system makes it extremely nimble, and it can be set up in three minutes, move out in two minutes, and conduct firing missions from as many as four different locations within one hour.

 

Ti6Al4V Justifies Its Choice
Improvements achieved for the titanium howitzer's include a 42% reduction in basic system weight, a 25% reduction in size.

 

Cool, I might use one for my asymmetric's prodder !

 

http://www.marinelink.com/news/business-titanium-case343678.aspx

Participants at a workshop exploring the use of titanium structure for ships found that it is not only possible to construct a ship hull from titanium—or Ti, it could be cost effective.

 

Comments like:

"reduced carbon emissions. "

And

"titanium welding processes are too slow for ship hull construction "

Make me think, someone is selling something.

I still think Titanium has its value, but I do not think it has the value to change operational procedure .... At a minimum 50% increase in cost?

Your 155 example had very VERY little to do with Titanium, most of the example you gave was the SUB-munition (not even the munition).

And if the gunner can't yell "Track!" It really ain't very fast for counter-battery fire ....

You do realize what is being fielded for counter battery fires?

 

Through the UNO investigation, advanced metal inert gas (MIG) welding and friction stir welding showed their potential.

, including gas tungsten arc welding, electron beam welding, high-power laser welding, friction stir and hybrids of the different methods. "The optimum approach depends on the structure’s configuration, joint design, performance requirements, and economic considerations."

“Titanium is highly reactive at elevated temperatures and requires shielding of the molten metal during welding and cooling,” says Jennifer Wolk, a materials engineer with Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC), Carderock Division specializing in welding and friction stir welding of non-ferrous materials.

“Most steel ships are scrapped because of corrosion of the hull, not problems with the machinery,” says Rob Moore at Textron Marine & Land Systems (TM&LS). “TOC is reduced by using a titanium hull.”

Aerospace grade titanium used in aircraft is about nine times more expensive than steel. But industry experts predict that “fit-for-purpose” ship hull or marine grades of titanium, as proposed by UNO, could be made less costly—perhaps only three times as expensive as steel —by changing the processing and finishing requirements. When weighed against its positive attributes, titanium may become even more cost effective.

 

That is more in line with what I thought.

That is WAY too expensive.

For an airborne drop-able (& therefore disposable) gun tube that is one thing. For aircraft that is one thing.

But, for a multi-billion dollar carrier when you can only afford one more ship?

That is too expensive. Pie in the sky wish list.

Not until space missions are completed will there be enough extra cash to pour into the fleet, and pay 35 billion for a 7 billion dollar carrier. I hope by that time, we do not need armies, navies, and air forces.

IMHO.