Full version publicly available at https://doi.org/10.1115/1.

4046742
Developing “Design by Analysis” Structurally, the novel aspect of a PVHO is the window, which is
needed to either observe people under treatment or for occupants
Methodology for Windows for Pressure to look out in order to accomplish a task. The windows are part of
a “viewport” assembly incorporated into the overall pressure ves-
Vessels for Human Occupancy sel structure. The assembly often includes elastomer or polymer
gaskets and significant preloads, potentially increasing the com-
plexity of loading on a window. Figure 1 shows the window seats
Bart Kemper incorporated into the titanium hull of the deep submergence vehi-
Mem. ASME cle (DSV) ALVIN prior to being installed as part of the deep-sea
Chair of Viewports Subcommittee, vessel’s refit. Figure 2 shows the illustration of the updated DSV
PVHO Committee, Alvin with the new hull and the windows incorporated into
Kemper Engineering Services, viewports.
4520 Jamestown Ave #3,
1.1 Pressure Vessel for Human Occupancy Code Develop-
Baton Rouge, LA 70808
ment. Historically, glass windows in PVHOs demonstrated two
e-mail: [email protected] key challenges: a tendency to leak along any imperfection of the
steel/glass interface and a tendency to fail rapidly once its
Linda Cross

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/risk/article-pdf/6/3/030906/6546985/risk_006_03_030906.pdf by guest on 03 July 2020

capacity is exceeded. These limitations constrained diving depths
Mem. ASME and durations, such as with the DSV TRIESTE [2]. As the need for
PVHO Committee, underwater depth increased, glass windows transitioned to fused
Member of the Medical Systems Subcommittee, quartz and the geometry transitioned to conical frustums. In addi-
tion to fused quartz, two other materials suitable for PVHO win-
Kemper Engineering Services,
dows are identified: polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), or
4520 Jamestown Ave #3, “acrylic”; and polycarbonate [1,2]. PMMA is used in the vast
Baton Rouge, LA 70808 majority of PVHO windows.
e-mail: [email protected] Early PVHO code development in the 1960s questioned how to
evaluate these materials for a variety of uncertainties and
performance-related phenomena. This included how well the win-
dow conformed to the seat, how fast defects propagated once they
The ASME pressure vessels for human occupancy (PVHO) codes
occurred, and how well could manufacturing flaws or in-service
and standards are engineering standards developed to provide a
defects could be detected. Validation & Verification (V&V) tech-
reliable design method for pressure vessel windows. This empiri-
niques were not a formal procedure in this time period but are
cal method is based primarily on years of government-sponsored
now a defined process [3]. Retroactively applying V&V to the
testing and development and does not directly use engineering
published literature which formed the current code captures key
theory. This empirical algorithm makes it challenging to revise
aspects of the original intent while shaping a modern design by
without additional large-scale physical testing. The industries
analysis method.
using the PVHO code need a way to incorporate advances in
Modern tools such as finite element analysis (FEA) are not only
material science, manufacturing technology, and overall engi-
an established part of modern pressure vessel design, but they
neering advances without spending years in code case review.
have also been used for acrylics in a variety of applications [4].
Verification and validation techniques, coupled with stochastic
FEA is being used to address issues not explicitly provided for in
finite element analysis (FEA) to address operational variables,
the current PVHO code, such as creep under load [5] and cyclic
can be the basis for a “design by analysis” method to complement
failure modes [6], in a manner consistent with other pressure ves-
the existing testing requirements to produce a full engineering
sel technology. This illustrates the need for a systematic method
package consistent with other pressure vessel and pressure vessel
to supplement the existing empirical algorithm used to design
component design. A design method sufficiently reliable for
PVHO windows.
PVHO could be used in other applications.
[DOI: 10.1115/1.4046742]

1 Introduction and Background

Pressure vessels for human occupancy (PVHO) are those pres-
surized systems which have living people within them. The engi-
neering code for designing PVHOs is ASME PVHO-1, which
defines its scope as “all pressure vessels that enclose a human
within their pressure boundary while under internal or external
pressure exceeding a differential pressure of 15 kPa (2 psi).
PVHOs include, but are not limited to, submersibles, diving bells,
and personnel transfer capsules, as well as decompression, recom-
pression, hypobaric, and hyperbaric PVHOs [1].” These are all
safety-critical applications, as a sudden decompression can cause
injury with pressures as low as 15 kPa (2 psig) and certain death at
higher pressures. While many PVHOs are intended for stable
medical facility environments, others are subject to extremes in
weather while in transportation and operations, often with impact
Fig. 1 A section of the titanium personnel hull of the Wood
loading, thermal shock, and complex heat transfer conditions. Holes Oceanographic Institute’s DSV ALVIN, with its PVHO-
A key safety aspect of pressure vessels is the entire pressure designed window seats, rated for 6500 m (2100 feet), prior to the
boundary that is only as reliable as its weakest component. new personnel section’s installation in the 2013 upgrade for the
deep submergence vehicle. The seats for the 90 deg conical
frustums are covered to protect the surface from damage which
Manuscript received May 4, 2019; final manuscript received February 9, 2020; could create a leak. The outer diameter of the windows is
published online May 20, 2020. Assoc. Editor: Sifeng Bi. 430 mm (17 in.) (Photo by Bart Kemper).

ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, SEPTEMBER 2020, Vol. 6 / 030906-1
Part B: Mechanical Engineering Copyright V
C 2020 by ASME
Fig. 2 The DSV ALVIN with the spherical hull installed and
viewports assembled. The acrylic conical frustum windows are
held in place by an outside ring (Artist’s rendition by Megan
Carroll, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute) (used with per-

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/risk/article-pdf/6/3/030906/6546985/risk_006_03_030906.pdf by guest on 03 July 2020

mission by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute).

1.2 Challenges and Shortfalls of an Empirical Algorithm.

The current window design process is contained in Sec. 2 of
PVHO-1 [1]. Detailed review shows little technical differences
from the rationale and recommendations established in 1973 [7]
and the first codified form in PVHO-1 in 1977. The process can be
simplified as follows:

(1) Select the window geometry from the pre-approved list.

(2) Select the maximum values for external pressure, internal
pressure, ambient temperature, and internal temperatures.
(3) Based on the above, determine the correction factor from
the appropriate table.
(4) Multiply the correction factor by the operational maxi- Fig. 3 A conical frustrum window design table from PVHO-1
mums, then use the adjusted pressure with the code- with illustrations of “one-way” (elevated pressure on one side”
specified curves for that geometry to determine the window and “two way” (elevated pressure on either side) assembled
thickness. An example design curve is shown in Fig. 3. viewports [1]. The window is the acrylic component with the
viewport being the full assembly, including window seat, retain-
ing ring, and bolts. Given the desired design pressure (modified
Despite no calculation of “allowable stresses” or similar tradi- by the correction factor), the chart returns a ratio of window
tional pressure design methods, there have been no incidents thickness to the diameter of the opening. Deflections, stresses,
attributed to PVHO-1 window design [8]. This algorithm has and strains of the window are not considered in the process
resulted in over four decades of successful, reliable window (from ASME PVHO-1. Used with permission).
designs spanning thousands of PVHO windows across medical
chambers, diving chambers, recompression chambers, and other such as “design by rule” (Section VIII, Div. 2, Part 4) and “design
permutations, including submarine windows with over 20 times by analysis” (Section VIII, Div. 2, Part 5) [11]. Design by analysis
the PVHO baseline of 10,000 cycles [6,9] and full-ocean depth provides a methodology to use FEA to include material curve
submarines that exceed the PVHO pressure chart [10]. development and load cases. There are similar “by rules” and “by
The fundamental challenge is that the algorithm is constrained to analysis” for postconstruction modifications, repairs, and useful
the specific tested and validated geometries. The ASME PVHO code remaining life assessments in ASME/API Fitness-for-Service [15].
does not incorporate a range of other mechanical and material prop- While there are methods for repair or derating acrylic structures in
erties typically considered in a pressure vessel design. For example, other applications, there are no provisions in ASME PVHO-2, the
temperature is used to identify a “correction factor,” but that does postconstruction safety code, for evaluating in-service acrylic win-
not determine material response at a given temperature nor does it dows other than addressing minor surface issues [16].
consider localized temperatures. Similar to traditional pressure ves- The assumptions used to numerically model a structure are
sel materials like steel, changing temperatures change the compres- important. The original window materials were discussed in detail
sive and tensile yield strength, compressive and tensile ultimate while developing the initial PVHO code. The current PVHO spec-
strength, modulus of elasticity, modulus of flexure, and other proper- ifications do not consider changes in polymer technology from the
ties. While metallic pressure vessels’ material properties are speci- original “Plexiglass G” and “MIL-P 8184” grades used in the orig-
fied at 27.8  C (50  F) intervals [11], acrylic has pronounced inal testing [2] to the modern crosslinked PMMA [17,18]. Implic-
changes in properties with temperature increments of only 5.6  C itly, it assumes that a material that meets the PVHO-1
(10  F) [7,12–14]. This indicates that the windows are more temper- requirements in PVHO-1 Tables 2-3.4-1 and -2 [1] will be suffi-
ature sensitive than the metallic portions of the pressure boundary. cient. Closer examination of the PVHO-1 material specification
Using an empirically developed algorithm instead of a more tables shows that this assumption is flawed. Materials have a
robust series of engineering calculations locks the design process specified “minimum elongation at break” to provide a measure of
into a closed-loop set of materials, geometries, and loads tested. A plastic deformation after yield, which is a measure of ductility.
novel design for a PVHO requires a “code case review,” a time- The PVHO code-specified minimum required elongation at break
consuming process where the information is submitted to the is 2% strain at an ultimate strength of 62 MPa (9000 psi), yet the
ASME PVHO committee for consideration for inclusion as a stand- elongation calculated using only the modulus of elasticity at the
alone exception to the code. These code cases do not change the same ultimate strength yields an elongation of 2.25%. This results
code process itself. Pressure vessel components other than acrylic in the PVHO-1 specification allowing fully brittle behavior for
windows have design processes that allow for alternate methods acrylics [19].

030906-2 / Vol. 6, SEPTEMBER 2020 Transactions of the ASME

 The proposed process allows for design adjustments based on Thin wall pressure vessel theory allows the wall to be mod-
specific risks and conditions, providing the flexibility to address eled as 2D membranes where the stress and strain due to
any industry. Currently, a specified geometry is indexed against a internal pressure is assumed to be uniform through the
single pressure and temperature to determine a thickness. In a thickness
manner similar to design by analysis in Section VIII, the more rig- Sy ¼ yield stress. The stress value below which the material
orous engineering method could be used to optimize thicknesses. response to load is considered “elastic” and recovers with-
For example, it could justify a window in a protected laboratory out deformation after loading. Stresses above the yield
environment be thinner than a window for similar geometry and value indicate some degree of “plastic,” or permanent,
pressure for an ocean-going PVHO. deformation
This goes beyond PVHO-specific applications. The fully devel- t/D ¼ thickness of the window divided by the window opening
oped process would reduce the need for code cases overall. Poten- diameter. Used for several established PVHO window geo-
tially, it allows all non-PVHO ASME pressure vessels to use the metries in PVHO-1
existing Authorized Inspector system for acrylic components.
This will avoid situations such as non-PVHO acrylic design code
cases being reviewed by the PVHO committee whose members References
have little or no exposure to a given industry and use, prolonging [1] American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2016, “Safety Standard for Pres-
a multiyear process further. sure Vessels for Human Occupancy,” American Society of Mechanical Engi-

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/risk/article-pdf/6/3/030906/6546985/risk_006_03_030906.pdf by guest on 03 July 2020

neers, New York, Standard No. PVHO-1.
[2] Stachiw, J. D., 2003, Handbook of Acrylics for Submersibles, Hyperbaric
4 Conclusion Chambers, and Aquaria, Best Publishing Company, Flagstaff, AZ.
[3] American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2006, Guide for Verification and
Window design methodology from landmark work resulted in Validation in Computational Solid Mechanics ASME V & V 10-2006: An Amer-
the ASME PVHO code and remains largely unchanged from the ican National Standard, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New
original recommendations. This empirical method is based pri- York, Standard No. V&V10-2006.
marily on years of testing, but does not directly use engineering [4] El-Qoubaa, Z., Colard, L., Boumbimba, R. M., and Rusinek, A., 2018,
“Experimental Study and Modelling of Poly (Methyl Methacrylate) and Poly-
theory. This makes changing the existing system exceedingly carbonate Compressive Behavior From Low to High Strain Rates,” J. Dyn.
challenging to revise without a large-scale government funded Behav. Mater., 4(2), pp. 179–89.
effort. The industries using the PVHO code need a way to incor- [5] Gao, Z. Z., Liu, W., Liu, Z. Q., and Yue, Z. F., 2010, “Experiment and Simula-
porate advances in material science, manufacturing technology, tion Study on the Creep Behavior of PMMA at Different Temperatures,”
Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng., 49(14), pp. 1478–482.
and overall engineering technology to explore weight and cost [6] Kemper, B., 2013 “Criteria for Eliminating Cyclic Limit for PVHO Flat Disc
reductions, application-specific risk mitigation, and other design Windows,” ASME Paper No. MTS2013-0323.
considerations. It is recommended that the existing PVHO code- [7] Stachiw, J. D., 1973, “Recommended Practices for the Design, Fabrication,
specified methods be retained for continuity and established Prooftesting and Inspection of Windows in Man-Rated Hyperbaric Chambers,”
U.S. Navy, accessed Jan. 6, 2019, https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/
design, similar to ASME BPVC Section VIII, Div. 1, and provide 773737.pdf
a methodology to allow engineers to use modern tools such as [8] Sheffield, J., and P & A Desautels, D., 1997, “Hyperbaric and Hypobaric Cham-
Finite Element Analysis and Computational Fluid Dynamics, sim- ber Fires: A 73-Year Analysis,” Undersea & Hyperbaric Medicine, Vol. 24,
ilar to ASME BPVC Section VIII, Div. 2, coupled with V&V Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society, NC, pp. 153–64.
[9] Atlantis Submarines, 2018, “Atlantis Submarines,” accessed Apr. 24, 2019,
methodology and stochastic modeling techniques, to produce https://atlantissubmarines.com/
designs outside the scope of the current ASME PVHO codes. It is [10] Five Deeps, 2019, “Expedition,” Five Deeps Expedition, accessed Apr. 28,
likely that a successful structural design method that is reliable 2019, https://fivedeeps.com/home/expedition/
enough for the risks associated with human occupancy will be [11] American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2017, ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code: An International Code, American Society of Mechanical Engi-
used in not only conventional pressure vessel applications but neers, New York, Standard No. BPVC-2017.
other structural use of glassy polymers. [12] Hassard, R. S., 1973, “Plastics for Aerospace Vehicles—Part II: Transparent
Glazing Materials,” U.S. Air Force Materials Laboratory, Air Force Systems
Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Standard No. MIL-HNDK-17A.
Acknowledgment [13] Stachiw, J., and McKay, J., 1972, “Windows for External or Internal Hydro-
The authors are volunteer members of the ASME Pressure Ves- static Pressure Vessels: Part 7—Effect of Temperature and Flange Configura-
tions on Critical Pressures of 90-Degree Conical Windows Under Short Term
sels for Human Occupancy Codes and Standards committee and Loading,” Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, CA, Report No.
subcommittees. Their participation has given them insight to the R-773.
history of the development of the PVHO code. This paper does [14] Wang, F., Wang, W., Zhang, Y., Du, Q., Jiang, Z., and Cui, W., 2019, “Effect
not represent the opinions of ASME Codes and Standards, the of Temperature and Nonlinearity of PMMA Material in the Design of Observa-
tion Windows for a Full Ocean Depth Manned Submersible,” Mar. Technol.
PVHO Committee, any of the subcommittees, or of the other vol- Soc. J., 53(1), pp. 27–36.
unteers. The authors are grateful for the ASME allowing the use [15] American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2016, “Fitness-For-Service,”
of images from other codes as well as the support of the Woods American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, Standard No. API 579-
Hole Oceanographic Institute for the information and use of 1/ASME FFS-1.
[16] American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2016, Safety Standard for Pressure
images regarding the DSV ALVIN. Vessels for Human Occupancy: In-Service Guidelines, American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, New York, Standard No. PVHO-2.
[17] Clark, T. R., Hertzberg, R. W., and Mohammadi, N. J., 1993, “Fatigue Mecha-
Nomenclature nisms in Poly (Methyl Methacrylate) at Threshold: Effects of Molecular Weight
and Mean Stress,” J. Mater. Sci., 28(19), pp. 5161–5168.
Pb ¼ primary bending stress. This represents the stress in a thin [18] Min, K., Silberstein, M., and Aluru, N. R., 2014, “Crosslinking PMMA: Molec-
wall pressure vessel where typically a moment is applied to ular Dynamics Investigation of the Shear Response,” J. Polym. Sci. Part B,
the structure to create “out-of-plane” stresses, using 2D 52(6), pp. 444–449.
[19] Kemper, B., 2019, “Shortfalls in Polymer Specifications for PVHOs,” Proceed-
simplification. An example is a lateral load on a pressure ings of Underwater Intervention, New Orleans, LA, Feb.
vessel flange [20] Kemper, B., Kemper, K., and Cutter, J., 2019, “NEMO Joint Design in ASME
Pm ¼ primary membrane stress. This represents the stress in a PVHO Code,” 16th Manned Underwater Vehicles Symposium, Marine Tech-
thin-walled pressure vessel due to internal pressure where nology Society, New Orleans, LA, Feb.
[21] Kemper, B., and Cross, L., 2018, “Heat Retention and Structural Integrity of
the walls are placed in a tension-only loading, or “in-plane” Glassy Polymer Windows,” 15th Manned Underwater Vehicle Symposium,
stress using 2D simplification Marine Technology Society, New Orleans, LA, Feb.
r/t ¼ inner radius (r) of the window divided by the thickness (t). [22] Whitlow, C. T., Yazdani, S. K., Reedy, ML., Kaminsky, S. E., Berry, JL., and
Used to evaluate whether thin-wall or thick-wall theory Morris, P. P., 2007, “Investigating Sacroplasty: Technical Considerations and
Finite Element Analysis of Polymethylmethacrylate Infusion Into Cadaveric
applies. r/t > 10 is “thick wall,” otherwise it is “thin wall.” Sacrum,” Am. J. Neuroradiol., 28(6), pp. 1036–041.

ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, SEPTEMBER 2020, Vol. 6 / 030906-7
Part B: Mechanical Engineering
[23] Dar, U. A., and Zhang, W., 2015, “Polymer Based Aerospace Structures Under Nov. 18, 2019, https://www.blanson.com/news/certification-of-asme-pressure-
High Velocity Impact Applications; Experimental, Constitutive and Finite Ele- vessels-incorporating-cast-acrylic-cylinders
ment Analysis,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol., 29(10), pp. 4259–4265. [34] Gasratova, N. A., Zuev, V. S., and Trukhin, M. M., 2018, “Concerning the
[24] Wang, Z., Wang, Y., Du, X., Zhang, T., and Heng, Y., 2019, “Study on the Determination of the Geometrical Parameters of the Optical Element of a
Fracture Properties of the PMMA Structure for the JUNO Central Detector,” Deep-Water Surveillance System,” Int. J. Eng. Technol., 7(4.36), p. 957.
KSCE J. Civ. Eng., 23(6), pp. 2584–2514. [35] Osage, D., and Sowinski, J. C., 2014, “ASME Section VIII—Division 2 Criteria
[25] Al-Rub, R. K., Abu, A. H., Tehrani, M. K., and Darabi, 2015, “Application of a and Commentary,” American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York,
Large Deformation Nonlinear-Viscoelastic Viscoplastic Viscodamage Constitu- Standard No. PTB-1-2014.
tive Model to Polymers and Their Composites,” Int. J. Damage Mech., 24(2), [36] Kemper, B., 2013, “Jurisdictional Acceptance of Non-ASME Pressure Vessels
pp. 198–244. for Human Occupancy,” ASME Paper No. MTS2013-0322.
[26] Michaeli, W., and Glißmann, M., 2001, “Concept for the Numerical Description [37] Stachiw, J. D., 2004, “Acrylic Plastic as Structural Material for Underwater
of the True Stress/Strain Behaviour of Semi-Crystalline Thermoplastics,” Vehicles,” Proceedings of the International Symposium on Underwater Tech-
Polym. Test., 20(5), pp. 591–596. nology, Taipei, Taiwan, Apr. 20–23.
[27] Gutierrez, M. A., and Krenk, S., 2004, “Stochastic Finite Element Methods,” [38] Goldsberry, C., 2019, “Reynolds Polymer Technology Completes Installation
Encyclopedia of Computational Mechanics, Vol. 2, Wiley, London. of Nearly 50-Foot Aquarium at Hong Kong Hotel,” PlasticsToday, accessed
[28] Stachiw, J., and Gray, K., 1969, “Windows for External or Internal Hydrostatic Dec. 15, 2019, https://www.plasticstoday.com/materials/reynolds-polymer-
Pressure Vessels: Part 1—Conical Acrylic Windows Under Short-Term Pres- technology-completes-installation-nearly-50-foot-aquarium-hong-kong-hotel/46
sure Application,” Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, CA, 914012462032
Report No. R-512. [39] Wouters, J. M., Doe, J. J., and Baker, W. E., 1991, “Effect of Panel Alignment
[29] Snoey, M. R., and Katona, M. G., 1970, Stress Analysis of a Conical and Surface Finish on Bond Strength,” accessed Apr. 3, 2020, https://www.
Acrylic Viewport, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, CA, p. osti.gov/servlets/purl/10186732
93043. [40] Goldsberry, C., 2019, “Reynolds Polymer Technology Creates World’s Tallest

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/risk/article-pdf/6/3/030906/6546985/risk_006_03_030906.pdf by guest on 03 July 2020

[30] Knight, N. F., 2006, Bearing-Load Modeling and Analysis Study for Mechani- Indoor Waterfall,” PlasticsToday, accessed Dec. 15, 2019, https://www.plastic-
cally Connected Structures, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, stoday.com/building-construction/reynolds-polymer-technology-creates-world-s-
Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA. tallest-indoor-waterfall/163091806860936
[31] Du, Q., Hu, Y., and Cui, W., 2017, “Safety Assessment of the Acrylic Conical [41] Parsons, D., 2014, “Automated Manufacturing Could Drive $125 Million From
Frustum Viewport Structure for a Deep-Sea Manned Submersible,” Ships Off- Cost of F-35 Canopies,” Flight Global, accessed Nov. 15, 2019, https://
shore Struct., 12(Suppl. 1), pp. S221–S229. www.flightglobal.com/automated-manufacturing-could-drive-125-million-from-
[32] Trudel, T., and Stanley, K., 2019, “Window Seat Weight Reduction Exploration cost-of-f-35-canopies/115372.article
With Nontraditional Seat Geometry,” Mar. Technol. Soc. J., 53(1), pp. 107–116. [42] Roberts, J., 2015, “Orion Windows Provide New Outlook for Spacecraft’s
[33] Blanson Acrylic Engineers, 2019, “Certification of ASME Pressure Vessels Future,” NASA, Washington, DC, accessed Nov. 15, 2019, https://www.nasa.
Incorporating Cast Acrylic Cylinders,” Blanson Acrylic Engineers, accessed gov/feature/orion-windows-provide-new-outlook-for-spacecraft-s-future

Full version publicly available at https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4046742

030906-8 / Vol. 6, SEPTEMBER 2020 Transactions of the ASME