bQrvarder_

333.

Robert G. Walden

Woods Hole Oceanographic inst,
Woods Hole, Wi 02068

Technical Report = PLASTIC MOORING BUOYS—COST AND ADDITIONAL

PERFORMANCE DATA

January 1970

Sponsored by

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

NAVAL CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY

Port Hueneme, California

This document has been approved for public
release and sale; its distribution is unlimited.

PLASTIC MOORING BUOYS—COST AND ADDITIONAL

PERFORMANCE DATA
Hooke.

Technical Report R-655

YF 38.534.006.01.003

by

Richard W. Drisko

ABSTRACT

Two plastic mooring buoys have provided good service as part of
moorings for the Fleet in San Diego Bay for a period of 4 years. One buoy
with a hand lay-up fiberglass-reinforced polyester shell is in appreciably better
condition than the other one with a spray-up shell of fiberglass-reinforced
polyester resin. A third plastic buoy with an improved design Is in excellent
condition after 1 year of service to the Fleet in Pearl Harbor. An analysis of
the costs of purchasing and maintaining steel and plastic mooring buoys is
presented. It indicates that after the present supply of World War I| mooring
buoys is exhausted, the Naval Facilities Engineering Command field activities
should use plastic mooring buoys as replacement becomes necessary.

This document has been approved for public release and sale; its distribution is unlimited

Copies available at the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific & Technical
Information (CFST1), Sills Building, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Va. 22151

INTRODUCTION

Because Naval Facilities Engineering Command field activities have
difficulties and spend a great deal of time and money in maintaining steel
mooring buoys, the Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory (NCEL) was assigned
the task of investigating plastic mooring buoys as a means of reducing mainte-
nance costs. Because the steel framework of the buoy Is filled with foam and
covered with glass-reinforced plastic skin, the only steel components of the
buoy exposed to hostile marine environment are the fittings used for securing
the buoy to ships and ground tackle.

The fabrication of two plastic mooring buoys is described in NCEL
Technical Report R-365.' One buoy has an exterior shell composed of ten
layers of fiberglass cloth impregnated with polyester resin; the other has an
exterior shell composed of a spray-up coating of chopped fiberglass strands
in polyester resin. The performance of these buoys while in service to the
Fleet in San Diego Bay for a period of 3 years is described in Technical
Report R-601.2 Reference 2 also describes the fabrication of another plastic
mooring buoy of improved design. The exterior shell of this buoy consists of
alternate layers of fiberglass cloth and mat impregnated with polyester resin.

This report provides additional data on the condition of the first two
buoys in San Diego Bay after 4 years and of the third buoy at Pearl Harbor
after 1 year of service to the Fleet. It also presents cost data for purchasing
and maintaining steel and plastic mooring buoys.

CONDITION OF BUOYS
San Diego Bay

After about 4 years of service to the Fleet, the two plastic mooring
buoys in San Diego Bay were lifted from the water onto the deck of a floating
crane for their annual inspection required by BUDOCKS Instruction 1153.4B
of 9 April 1965. During the previous year these buoys had received moderate
to heavy usage. The marine fouling organisms were examined and then removed
with a high-pressure stream of seawater (Figure 1) so that the underlying sub-
strate could be examined. On both buoys there was moderate to heavy fouling

WOONONA

0 0301 004040

Figure 1. Hosing of marine fouling from hand lay-up buoy in San Diego Bay.

similar to that on steel buoys exposed in the Bay for the same length of time.
Fouling organisms included green algae (heaviest in the splash-zone), barnacles,
tunicates, bryozoa, tube worms, and hydroids. The barnacles were compara-
tively few in number but large in size. The organisms were rather easily removed
(as they are from steel buoys) by high-pressure hosing with seawater.

Hand Lay-Up Buoy. The hand lay-up buoy was still in very good
condition after about 4 years of service to the Fleet. There was considerable
superficial white staining by guano on the top and side (Figure 2). There was
also rust streaking from the steel mooring eyes and hardware used to secure
the fenders in place. The upper lateral fender, which had previously been torn
loose by impact and later wired back in place, was still providing good protec-
tion. The two test patches* made on the buoy side after one-half year of
service were also in good condition. Most of the reflective glass beads embed-

ded in the buoy coating had been lost above water, but many remained below
water.

* See Reference 2.

Figure 2. Hand lay-up buoy in San Diego Bay after 4 years of service.
Note guano staining on side and slight displacement of upper
lateral fender.

Spray-Up Buoy. The spray-up buoy (Figure 3) had continued to
deteriorate slightly during the last year. The upper shoulder had numerous
cracks in the outer skin from which rust was streaking (Figure 4). Guano
buildup and staining were not so great as on the hand lay-up buoy. The
exterior shell was cracked through to the polyurethane-foamed core in three
places—one normally above the water (Figure 5) and two below (Figure 6).
These cracks were over 1 foot in length, but did not permit sufficient passage
of water to affect the flotation of the buoy or its service to the Fleet. The
middle lateral fender, held in place by a steel cable, had also been displaced
(Figure 5) by the impact of aship. The two test patches in the side (Figure 4)
were in good condition. The above superficial damage did not seem to have
any effect on the utilization of the buoy.

Figure 4. Upper portion of spray-up buoy in San Diego Bay after 4 years of service. Note
worn upper wooden fender, deteriorated shoulder, and square at bottom center.

Figure 5. Side of spray-up buoy in San Diego Bay. Note displaced
middle fender and crack in shell above it.

Figure 6. Crack in shell of spray-up buoy located below waiter line.

Pearl Harbor

The plastic mooring buoy with the improved design was installed by
Public Works Center, Pearl Harbor as part of a bow and stern mooring for a
barge in a reserve area. As such, it receives much less abuse than do the two
buoys in San Diego Bay. The buoy is examined quarterly by Public Works
Center personnel; it was examined by the NCEL project scientist about 1 year
after installation. The buoy at that time had heavy marine fouling, but very
little corrosion or other deterioration. Rust streaking from the steel mooring
eye and the hardware used to secure the fenders in place was very slight. The
outer skin was also relatively free of dirt and yellowing. All in all, the buoy
was in excellent condition (Figure 7).

During inspection of the buoy it was brought to the author's attention
that several steel mooring buoys at Pearl Harbor had been coated with alternate
layers of fiberglass cloth and mat impregnated with polyester resin similar to the
construction of the plastic buoy exposed at this location. Many of these buoys
have had extensive yellowing of the white finish coat (Figure 8). A similar
yellowing was observed on the exterior of the San Diego spray-up buoy at the
time of initial installation. This yellowing appears to be related to degradation
of the resin by ultraviolet light and suggests that an ultraviolet light absorber
incorporated into the finish coat may be desirable.

Figure 7. Plastic buoy after 1 year of service at Pearl Harbor.

Figure 8. Steel mooring buoys at Pearl Harbor with yellowed
fiberglass-reinforced polyester coating.

COST COMPARISONS FOR STEEL AND PLASTIC
MOORING BUOYS

Cost data for purchasing and maintaining components of Fleet
moorings are very difficult to obtain because of differences in design, number,
type and frequency of use, and maintenance procedures from activity to
activity.

Procurement of Buoys

The San Diego Bay plastic mooring buoys were fabricated efficiently;
the contractor's cost breakdown for each buoy is shown in Table 1. The
Pearl Harbor plastic mooring buoy was fabricated by a contractor who proved
to be less efficient; his estimated cost was about $10,000. In all three cases,
the costs included time spent on development of a fabrication procedure. Thus,
amass production of plastic mooring buoys should lower significantly the cost
per buoy.

Table 1. Cost Data on Fabrication of San Diego Plastic Mooring Buoys

Cost ($) for—
Hand Lay-Up Buoy | Spray-Up Buoy

Labor on materials other than plastics 1,327.58 1,327.59
Labor on plastic materials V ZEN} 591.22
Total labor (1 + 2) 2,558.81 1,918.81
Total material 4,926.32 4,803.82
Manufacturer's overhead (80% of 3) 2,047.05 FoS5105
Total standard cost (3 + 4 + 5) 9,532.18 8,257.68

General administration expense (20%
of 3) 511.76 383.76

Total burden (6 + 7) 10,043.94 8,641.44

Steel buoys currently used by NFEC field activities were built in
large quantities during World War ||. The surplus buoys were stored for use
as required, and now these buoys have almost been exhausted. A few Mark ||
peg-top mooring buoys (Federal Stock Catalog No. 2050-275-7681) are still
available at the Construction Battalion Center, Port Hueneme at a nominal
price of $2,120 each. Before use as part of a mooring, these buoys require
removal of the shop coating and recoating with a system suitable for marine
exposure. Also, modification of the buoy might be necessary for a particular
type of mooring operation. For example, at San Diego, the hawse pipe would
be replaced with a tension bar. It is estimated that the complete fabrication
of a new steel buoy ready for use in San Diego would cost between $10,000
and $12,000, a price comparable to that of a plastic buoy. Thus, the relative
maintenance costs of the two types of buoys would be the determining factors
in the selection of either type of buoy once the limited supply of steel buoys
is exhausted.

Maintenance of Buoys

Steel Buoys. It is difficult to separate the costs associated with maintain-
ing mooring buoys from those of maintaining the rest of the mooring since both
are rehabilitated together. Cost data were assembled for removal, overhaul, and

reinstallation of four Fleet moorings by Public Works Center, San Diego.
These were seven- and eight-legged moorings (BB Type) with Mark || peg-top
riser-chain mooring buoys. The codes of the work center performing the
various phases of the work are listed in Table 2. Sandblasting for surface
preparation of metal for painting was done by Work Center 540 (General
Support Shop). Both rigging and diving services fall under Work Center 540,
and this number will refer to rigging service unless otherwise specified.

Table 2. Identification of Work Center Codes

Engineering Department; Civil Engineering Division
Inspection Division

Paint Shop

General Support Shop

Welding Shop

Wharf Building Shop

Utilities Shop

Transportation Department (Equipment Rental)
Automotive Operations

Heavy Equipment Operations

Rigging Service (also Diving Service)

Heavy Equipment Maintenance

Tables 3, 4, and 5 list Planning and Estimating Branch estimates for
work scheduled for moorings 34, 35, 36, and 37, respectively. The actual
man-hours spent to accomplish the work were considerably more than esti-
mated. Also, labor costs have since increased by 10% and material costs by
25% (40% for lumber, Work Center 534; 20% for paint, Work Center 525;
and 10% for other materials). This is tabulated in Table 6 along with correc-
tions for actual man-hours and material costs. From this table the projected
(June 1969) average removal, overhaul, and reinstallation costs for the mooring
were calculated to comprise 20%, 34%, and 43%, respectively, of the total
rehabilitation costs. The costs associated with the buoy comprised about

30% (an average of $2,345) and the ground tackle portion 70% (an average of
$5,480). A higher percentage of costs for the ground tackle was due to high
labor costs associated with sandblasting the chain prior to dip-coating. With
three- and four-legged moorings the relative costs of the work should be about
the same for the buoy as for the ground tackle.

It should be noted that the factors affecting maintenance costs of
rehabilitating moorings at San Diego may be quite different from those at
other NFEC field activities. While conditions in San Diego are severe, condi-
tions may be appreciably worse in tropical environments. In cold areas, factors
contributing to corrosion should be appreciably less. The mooring maintenance
operations at Public Works Center, San Diego are considered to be quite effi-
cient, and maintenance costs at other field activities may be appreciably
greater. Only a survey of data from other locations could indicate the relative
maintenance costs at activities other than Public Works Center, San Diego.

BUDOCKS Instruction 1153.4B of 9 April 1965 calls for (1) annual
inspection of mooring buoys for damage, deterioration or corrosion, and
physical condition of the ground tackle connected to the buoy, (2) lifting of
buoys from the water every 3 years for painting and required repairs, and
(3) hauling out of the water, inspecting, and rehabilitating the complete
mooring assemblies every 3 years where there are adverse bottom conditions
and every 5 years where there are favorable bottom conditions. Public Works
Center, San Diego follows the 3-year program for both buoys and their ground
tackle.

Plastic Buoys. Very few data are available on the costs of maintaining
plastic buoys. After 4 years of heavy duty in San Diego Bay, there is no evi-
dence of significant deterioration on the hand lay-up buoy that would require
removal ashore for repairs in the near future. The buoy at Pearl Harbor seems
to have no significant deterioration after 1 year of service, and the overall
appearance is better than that of the San Diego hand lay-up buoy after a simi-
lar period of time.

CONCLUSION

NCEL studies? into cathodic protection of moorings indicate that it
would be unnecessary to move moorings ashore for maintenance if the chains
were protected from corrosion by sacrificial zinc anodes. It would seem logi-
cal to utilize in conjunction with such a system a mooring buoy that gives a
longer service life between periods of necessary overhaul than that of the
presently used steel buoys. A plastic mooring buoy appears to fulfill this
requirement. Reinforced plastic navigational buoys have also been shown*
to be less expensive to maintain than comparable steel buoys.

Table 3. Estimated Costs for Fleet Mooring 34

Cost oe ce oe

Phase of Work Work Center Man-Hours

ee

; :

Removal of mooring i )
)

Overhaul of mooring

210

700

722

724
Reinstallation of mooring 728 (divers)
728 (riggers)

772

total

210
332
525
540
542
543
Total work 700
722
724
728 (divers)
728 (riggers)
772

SEO ZOSOLOINROLOR@LOLORO)

total

* Information only

11

Table 4. Estimated Costs for Fleet Moorings 35 and 36

(Cost estimates for both Fleet moorings were identical.)

Costs ($)
Phase of Work Work Center Man-Hours

Removal of mooring

Overhaul! of mooring

210

700
722 27
724 3
Reinstallation of mooring 728 (divers) 768
728 (riggers) 1,550

772

total

622 (removal)
622 (installation)

Telephone removal and
installation

total

210

332
525
540
542
543
622
700
722
724

728 (divers)

728 (riggers)

772

Total work

total

* Information only

12

Table 5. Estimated Costs for Fleet Mooring 37

Phase of Work

Removal of mooring

Overhaul of mooring

Reinstallation of mooring

Total work

* Information only

Work Center

210
700
722
724
728 (divers)
728 (riggers)
Te

total

210
332
525
540
542
543
700
722
724
728 (divers)
728 (riggers)
WIZ.

total

Man-Hours

Costs ($)

Materials

13

OO OrOLOiE Ns. OL Oro, O10

99v'L 976

ZLEe'L O82
709'8 LEG cS G7S'L 6SS'L OZL'L

699' | OZL'L

CLE'L gol
Lvc Et L 902 1L=88L*6
BEL'E € 092 SLY L6S'7=1'8 x BLE
6062 002 ogt | 6rs'z L69'L =Ev'L X GLZ
OLL'L 0 GLL G6c'L Br L'L=9E7L x OGL

\ua}e joqe (SBE

Jeo] Seu sal jeio, | sayio | sjeuarey sunoy-uew Bae)

$9 %OL

$0 %GC

($) sysog payalosg

($) sisog Jeno

soge

SINOH-Ue\
jenjoy

abesany
Le
9E
Ge
ve

abelany
Le
9
GE
ve

abeiany
LE
9E
Ge
vE

abelany

LE
96
Ge
ve

abesany
LE
9€
Se
vE

Burooy\

Ee
Pa
pia
eeu
ce

$}SOD |€1O] $O }UdDIEg

je10 |

sauoydaya |

uole|jeysulay

|NEYIaAQ

jeaowa Yy

JOM $O aseyd

goueUAa}UIe|\| SHUILOOW\) JO} $1S0D (GGG eUNP) pazIefo14 PU sIsOD enjoy payejnojeg “g ajge]

14

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

LT Richard F. Heine, formerly of Public Works Center, San Diego and
currently senior Activity Civil Engineer at Naval Training Center, San Diego,
spent considerable time gathering the data presented in Tables 2 through 6;
his contribution is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

1. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Report R-365: Plastic
mooring buoys - pt. |. Fabrication of experimental models, by R. W. Drisko
and T. Roe. Port Hueneme, Calif., Mar. 1965. (AD 612055)

De . Technical Report R-601: Plastic mooring buoys - pt. I1. Completion
of test program, by R. W. Drisko. Port Hueneme, Calif., Nov. 1968.
(AD 845132)

3: . Technical Note N-975: Cathodic protection of mooring buoys and
chain - pt. 1V. Additional field studies with cables providing continuity, by
R.W. Drisko. Port Hueneme, Calif., Aug. 1968, and earlier reports referenced
therein. (AD 839338L)

4. ‘Reinforced plastic lighted buoys; their practical and econmical advantages,”
Dock and Harbour Authority, vol. 45, no. 530, Dec. 1964, pp. 259-260.

No. of
Activities

281

Total
Copies

20

281

DISTRIBUTION LIST

Defense Documentation Center

Naval Facilities Engineering Command
NAVFAC Engineering Field Divisions
Public Works Centers

Public Works Center

RDT&E Liaison Officers at NAVFAC
Engineering Field Divisions and
Construction Battalion Centers

NCEL Special Distribution List No. 5

for persons and activities interested in
reports on Deterioration Control

Wd

Le ede
By

UN
uM)

tals

tt
uy

ay

ah

*Asessaoau

sauooaq jualuadeR|das se sAong Bulioow d1jse|d asn pynoys saijziAijoe pjaly PUeWILWOD Bulsaauibuy

SalpI|I9e 4 JEAEN 94} ‘paysneyxa si sAong Bulioow {| Je/y\ P[AONA $0 Ajddns juasasd ay} 4aqye 1eYL

| sayesipul }] “pajzuasaid si sAong Bulsoow 3d1}sejd pue jaays Buiuiejuiew pue Bulseyoind jo s}soo

| dy} Jo sisAjeue UY “JOQIeH |4e8q Ul 189}+4 AY} O} BdIANaS JO JeBA | 4Aa1J$e UOI}ZIPUOD JUA||aDx—a UI! SI

uBisap panosdwi ue yim Aong oijsejd puiyy YY “ulsad JaysaAjOd pao10juIas-ssejBiaqiy JO |;ays

| dn-Aesds © Yy}IM aU 1940 BY} UBY} UO!}IPUOD 4a}}3aq Ajqeidaidde ul si |jays 4asaAjOd padsojulas

-sse|Gsaqiy dn-Ae; puey e yiim Aong auc ‘sieaA % 40 poliad e 104 Aeg obaiq ues ul }a9}+4
yi 10} sbulsoOW jo yJed se adIMNas pooh papiAoid aney sAOnq bulsoow d13se|d OM |

€00°LO'900'VES'8E SA ‘1 JO aDUeWI0}184g—sAong Bulsoow d13se}q “|
Paljissejouy OZ6L Asenuer GS9-4L

Orstig “M PAeydiy Aq ‘WiVG JONVWYHOsAYAd
TVNOILIGGVY GNV LSOD—SAONA ONIHOOW OILSV1d

snd ZL

|
|
|
|
— ——
|
|
| *Aaessaoau
| sawooaq jUuawase|das se sAong Bulioow 91}se\d asn pynoys saiziAiz9e Pjaly PUeWIWOD Buljiaauibuy
SAIZIIOe4 JEAeNy ay} ‘paysneyxa si sAong Bulsoow 4) Je PJAONA 4O Ajddns juasaid ay} sazye JeYL
| sa}eoipul }| “pajzuasaid si sAong Bulsoow o13se\|d pue jaaqys Buiuiezyulew pue Bulseyoind jo s}soo
| ay} JO sisAjeue uy “JOqIe} |Jeaq Ul 189|4 AY} O} BdIAJaS JO JeBA | 4A]4e UOI}IPUOD 1UAa]jadx~a UI! SI
uBisap panosdwui ue yim Aong o13sejd puiyi yy ‘ulsas JalsaAjod padioyuias-ssejGsaqiy Jo jays
dn-Aeids e yiIM auo JaYy}0 ay} UBY} UOI}IPUOD 4Ja}}aq Ajqeisaidde uI si |jays 4aZsaAjOd padsojulas

-sse|Biaqiy dn-Aey puey e yim Aong aug ‘sieaA py JO poliad e 10) Aeg oBaiq ues ul jaa}4
au} 40} sbulsooW yo yed se adiAuas poob papiaoid aney sAOng Bulsoow o1}sejd OM |

€00°1L0'900'°PES'8E 4A ‘I JO aUeUIOJ18g—sAong BulooW 913Se}q “|

paljissejoun O61 Asenuer GS9-H.L

oystug “M P4eysiy Aq ‘VWiVG JAONVWHOSYSd

TVNOILIGGVY GNV LSOD—SAONE ONIYOOW SILSV 1d
Asoyesoge) BursaauiBu gz jiaig jeaen

snd ZL

*Asessacau
sauosaq }uawade|das se sAong Bulioow d1}se\d asn pynoys saiziAi9e Pjaly PUeEWLWOD BulaeuIBUg
Saiz lOe4 jeEAeQY BYI ‘paysneyxea si sSAong Bulsoow 4) JeAA PAO $0 Ajddns jUasaid ay} Jaze YeYL
sajeoipul }j ‘pazuasaid si sAong Bulsoow 31jse;d pue jaajs Bulureyuiew pue Gulseyoind jo s}soo
8y} JO SisAjeue UY “AOGIe} [4edq Ul 199] 4 BY} O} BdIAJaS $O 4JeBA | J91Je UOIIPUOD jUAa|/a9x~a UI SI
uBisap panosduui ue YyiiM Aong d1}sejd ply) YW “ulsas 4aysaAjod pads0julas-ssejGsaqiy $O {Jays
dn-Aedds e yiIM UO J8Y4}0 AY} UeY} UO!}IPUOD 1a}}aq Ajqeisaidde uI s! |jaYs 4a}saAjod padsiOjuUlas
-ssejBiaqiy dn-Ae; puey e yyim Aong aug ‘sia fy JO poliad e 410} Aeg ofaiq ues ul jaa]4

84} 410} shulsoOW Jo Ved se adiAJas pooh papiAoid aaey sAong Bulsoow dijsejd om

€00'10'900'VES"8E JA “| JO aoueU40j184g—sAong BulooW onse14 “|

Paljisse jour) OZ6L Asenuer SS9-Y1

ost “M Pseysiy Aq ‘WiVG JONVWHOSYSd

TVNOILIGGVY GNV LSOD—SAONE ONIHOOW OILSVW1d
Asoyesoge) BuraauiBug jiaig jeaen

snd ZL

*Asessaoau |

sawosaq }UaUase}das se sAonq Bulsoow da1}se}d asn Pynoys saiziAijoe pjaly PUeWIWOD Buissauibuy |
saline 4 |eAe\Y 34} ‘paysneyxea si sAong Bulsoouw || AeAA PAO JO Ajddns jUasasd ay} sae JeEUI

sajeo1pul 3} “pajuasaid si sAong Bulsoow o1jsejd pue jaaq}s Bulueyuiew pue Bulseyoind jo s}soo |
Ay} JO sisAjeue UY “IOQUE} |4edq Ul 398} 9Y} 0} BdIAUaS JO JeaA | 419}Je UO!Z!PUOD 1UA]|adx~a UI SI

uBisap panoiduw ue yim Aong oijsejd psy} Y ‘ulsas 4aysaAjod padsojuiai-ssejBsaqiy 4O {Jays |

dn-Aedjds e yiIM aU JaY}1O 84} Ue} UOI}!PUOD 4a}3aq Ajqelsaidde ul si |jays 4a3saAjod padsojulas |

-ssejBiaqiy dn-Ae; puey e yim Aong aug ‘sieaA % JO polsad e 405 Aeg ofaiq ues ul 18a}+4

8u4} 104 sBulsoow jo jJed se adIAas pooh papiaoid aney sAong Bulioow d1}se}d OM] |

|

|

|

€00°L0°900°vES'8E JA ‘I Jo adUeWOLIag—sAong BuI10oW o13se|q4 *|

paljisse|Sur) OL6L Asenuer snd ZL GS9O7Hdr

OysIug “M PseydiY Aq ‘VWLVG JONVWHYHOSYAd

TVNOILIGGVY GNV LSOO—SAONA ONIYOOW OI1LSV 1d
Asoyesoge BuisaauiBu gz jig jeaen

*Asessaoou

sawosaq JUuaWwadeR|dai se sAong Bulioow d1jse\d asn pjnous saijziAijoe pPjaly PUeWIWOD Bulsaauibuy

SaITJIOe4 |eAe\Y AY} ‘paysneyxea si sSAong Bulsoow || IEA, PJAOM $0 Ajddns jUasaid ay} 4a}ye Jey

| sajedipul }| “pajzuasaid si sAong Bulsoow 91}sejd pue jaais Bujuieyulew pue Bulseydind jo s}soo

| Su} JO sisAjeue UY “1OGIeH |Jedq Ul 188}+4 AY} O} BdIAJAaS JO IedA | 4Ja}}¥e UOIIPUOD JUAa||aox~a Ul SI

uBisap parojdw ue yim Aong oisejd pilui YY ‘ulsad Ja}saAjOd pao10juIaJ-ssejGsaqiy $o |Jaus

| dn-Aeids e yiIM aU 48430 84} UB} UO!}IPUOD Ja}}3aq Ajqeidaidde ul si |jays JaJsaAjod paosojulas

-sse|Biaqiy dn-Aej puey e yyIm Aong aug ‘sea yp 4o poliad e 40} Aeg o6aiq ues ul }3aa}]4
dy} 10} sbulioow 40 qed se adiAsas pooh papiaoid aney sAong Bulsoow a13sejd OM

€00°L0°900'rES'8E 4A ‘I 4O aUeUWO}184g—sAong Busoow dI3se1q4 “|

palyissejoun OL6L Asenuer GS9-HL

oysiid “M Pueys!y Aq ‘WiWG JONVWHOSYAd

TVNOILIGGVY GNV LSOD—SAONE ONIYOOW OILSW1d
Aioyesoge ButsaauiBu 3 jtaig jeaen)

sniid Zp

|
|
| *Asessaoau
| sawooag }uawase|das se sAong Bulioow 313se;d asn pjnoys saiziAljoe Pjaly PUBWIWWOD Buliaauibuy
Saiijloe4 JeAeN ay} ‘paysneyxa si sAong Bulsoow |] se PjsAO/A 4O Ajddns juasaid ayy saqye ey}
| se1e01pul 1] ‘pajuasaid si sAong Bulsoow 31}sejd pue jaays GBuiurezulelw pue Bulseyoind jo s}soo
| ay} 4O SisAjeue UY “JOqUeH [4e8q Ul 189}4 AY} O} BdIAJAS JO Je|A | JaIYe UO!]IPUOD }Ua}jaOx~ UI! SI
uBisap panoidu! ue yim Aong o1jsejd psy) Wy ‘“ulsas 4a3saAjod paosojulas-ssejbsaqiy $o [|ays
| dn-Aedsds e YyiIM au0 18420 AY} ULY}) UO!}IPUOD 49},aq Ajqeidaidde ul si |jays 4a}SaAjod paosojulas
| -ssejBiaqis dn-Aej puey e yiim Aong aug ‘sieaA pF JO poliad e 10} Aeg ofaiq ues ul 1aa}4
8yi JO} shulsOOW jo Led se adipuas pooh papiaoid aney sAong Bulsoow d1jse\d OM |

€00°L0°900'PES'8E 4A ‘| JO aueULIOJ19g—sAong BulooW a138e1q “|

OZ6L Asenuer GSO-Y.L
OysIGg “M Pseydiy Aq ‘VYIWG JONVINHOSHSd

TIVNOILIGGV GNV LSOD—SAONE ONIYOOW OILSW1d
Asoyesoge 7 BursaauiBu gz jiaig jeaen

paljissejouQ snd ZL

*Asessaoau
saWodaq }Uuawade|da, se sAong Bulsoow d13se|d asn pjnoys sarzIAljOe pjaly PueWWOD Bulaeulbug
Saiqil9e4 jeAeK 843 ‘paysneyxa si sAong Bulsoow || 1e\A PAO $O Ajddns juasaid ay} sayye yeu
sajeoipul 3} “pa}uasaid si sAong Bulsoow oisejd pue jaajs Bururezulew pue Bulseyoind jo s}soo
34} $0 SisAjeue UY “AOqUeH} |Jeaq Ul 189|4 84} 0} BdIAJAaS JO JeaA | 49}Je UO!}IPUOD }UA}]a9xe UI SI
uBisap panosduu! ue yim Aong dijsejd psy YY ‘ulsai Ja3saAjod paasojulas-sse|B1aqiy 40 Jays
dn-Aesds e yi1M BuO J84}0 84} UY} UO!IPUOD 4a139q Ajqeloa1dde ul si {jays 1a}SaAjOd paosOjulas
-sse|Biaqiy dn-Ae; puey e yim Aong auc ‘siaA % JO poliad e 40} Aeg ofaig ues ul 89]4

342 410} SbulJooUW Jo JJed se adiAsas pooh papiAoid aney sAong Bulsioow o13sejd OM

£00°L0°900'VES'8E JA “| JO B9UBUIO}.184—shong Bulioow o1se{q “|

PalsissejoUr) OZ6L Asenuer ‘dL SSO LH
OSG “M Preysiy Aq ‘WiVG SJONVIWYOSYAd

TIVNOILIGGY GNV LSOD—SAONA ONIYOOW SILSV 1d
Asoyesoge BursaauiBuz jar jeaeny

sn

Een tee nen

*Aaessaoau
sauooeq jUaWwadeR|dai se sAong Bulsoow d13se/d asn pynous saizIAijOe pjaly PUeLULUOD Bulsaauibuy
Salqloe4 JeAeny aYyi ‘Paysneyxa si sAong Bulsoow || JEM PJsONA $O Ajddns uasaid ay} saye PeYY
S8}B9IPU! | “PajUasaid si sSAOng BulsooU JI3sejd pue jaajs GBurureyujew pue Buiseyoind yo s}soo
94} $O sisAjeue UY “1OqGIe} [4eaq Ul 388]~+4 94} 0} BdIAJaS JO JeaA | 19}Je UOIIPUOD }UAa|\aDx~ UI SI
uBisap panoiduui ue yim Aong oijsejd piyi YY “ulsas JaysaAjod paodsojulas-ssejGsaqiy Jo [jays
dn-Aeids e YIM au0 48410 AY} UEY} UO!}IPUOD 49}3aq Ajqel9aidde UI! si! |jaYys 1a3saAjod paosojulas
-sse|6seqiy dn-Ae; puey e yim Aong aug ‘sieaA vy $0 poliad e 10} Aeg ofa1q ues u! jaa|4

ay) 40} sBulsooW Jo Wed se adimuas poOb papiAoid aney sAonq Bulioow o13se}d OM]

£00°LO"900'°PES'8E 4A ‘1 JO aNUeULIOJ184g—sAong BuJOOW d138e\4 “1

OL6) Asenuer SG9-Y1

OxsHg “M PleydIy Aq ‘WLWG JONVWHOSYAd
TVNOILIGGY GNV LSOD—SAONA ONIYOOW SILSV1d
Asoyesoge 7 BulsaauiBugz jag jeaen

Palsissejour) snyid ZL

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

ay

eae |
uae 2

3

4

3

Security Classification

DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA-R&D

(Security Classification of title, body of abstract and indexing annotation niust be entered when the overall report is classified)
ORIGINATING ACTIVITY (Corporate author) 28. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory Unclassified
° 2b. GROUP
on pane oe Mh ee ne

REPORT TITLE

PLASTIC MOORING BUOYS—COST AND ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE DATA

DESCRIPTIVE NOTES (Type of report and inclusive dates)
Not final; July 1968—July 1969

AUTHOR(S) (First name, middle initial, last name)

Richard W. Drisko

6 REPORT DATE Ja. TOTAL NO. OF PAGES
January 1970 17 4

6a.

CONTRACT OR GRANT NO 94. ORIGINATOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

.prosectno. YF 38.534.006.01.003

D

TR-655

96. OTHER REPORT NO(S) (Any other numbers that may be aasigned
this report)

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

This document has been approved for public release and sale; its distribution is unlimited.

» SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY

Naval Facilities Engineering Command
Washington, D. C. 20390

ABSTRACT

Two plastic mooring buoys have provided good service as part of moorings
for the Fleet in San Diego Bay for a period of 4 years. One buoy with a hand lay-up
fiberglass-reinforced polyester shell is in appreciably better condition than the other
one with a spray-up shell of fiberglass-reinforced polyester resin. A third plastic
buoy with an improved design is in excellent condition after 1 year of service to the
Fleet in Pearl Harbor. An analysis of the costs of purchasing and maintaining steel
and plastic mooring buoys is presented. It indicates that after the present supply of
World War || mooring buoys is exhausted, the Naval Facilities Engineering Command
field activities should use plastic mooring buoys as replacement becomes necessary.

ia we "(PAGE 1) Unclassified

S/N 0101-807-6801 Security Classification

Unclassified

Security Classification

KEY WOROS

Plastic mooring buoys

Hand lay-up buoy

Spray-up buoy

Steel mooring buoys

Deterioration

Maintenance

Cost

Fabrication

Fiberglass-reinforced polyester coating

Performance

DD (2r"..1473 (Back) Unclassified

(PAGE 2) Security Classification

v