SSS- Simple Submarine Systems

[Gannet]

PanAmMan

Since I notice that you live in the USA

Did you checked out the following to ensure you are compliant with the Regulations?

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/NVIC/pdf/1993/n5-93.pdf

Also, could you keep us abreast of your progress, problems, or lessons-learned

Thanks in Advance

[Dave Gudeman]

Hi, PanAmMan, I've been lurking on these forums for several weeks and just decided to join in order to reply to this thread .

The idea of having the exit hatch below the mid-line is surprising to me. Are you expecting passengers to crawl through a horizontal tunnel to enter and exit the sub? That's going to limit this sub pretty much to men under the age of 35 and women under 25. Older people just won't do that. We have our dignity to think of, you know .

Can't you solve the safety concern with pressure hatches? And don't you want pressure hatches anyway for safety at depth? If you have a breach at 200', the fact that the breach is below the mid-line is not going to help, but if you had three compartments separated by pressure hatches, you could evacuate the breached compartment, close the hatches, and keep 2/3 of the sub dry. This also gives you a lot more time to decide what to do because you aren't sitting around in hypothermia-producing water while breathing bends-producing high-pressure nitrogen. You even have a good chance of avoiding evacuation altogether and saving the sub. Even a sub with one flooded compartment is probably safer than a life raft.

Here is a proposal on how to do pressure chambers in concrete: instead of pouring one cylinder, poor three spheres. Join the spheres in a line with steel pressure hatches between and poor a heavy concrete backbone below and a lighter one above the line of spheres. In addition, one of the end chambers has an exit hatch going up and the chamber at the other end has an exit hatch going down. Both external hatches have the extra layer of backbone concrete for safety, and no matter what chamber is flooded, you can get to one of the hatches.

Of course, this isn't a very hydrodynamic shape, but I think you should be thinking in terms of a superstructure anyway. No one wants to spend all their time cooped up in a pressure hull and you need an exit that is far enough above the water to open the hatch without waves swamping the sub. How about a fiberglass superstructure with a large flat deck that rides a few feet above the water when the sub is at the surface? In effect, it turns your submarine into a SWASH (Small Waterplane Area Single Hull) when at the surface. You want to be able to pilot from above, especially for navigating in traffic and for docking. The dings and stresses of the dock would go against the fiberglass instead of the concrete, and for minor collisions, you wouldn't have to worry about cracks in the concrete because the fiberglass would absorb the impact.

The superstructure would also allow you to carry things outside the pressure hull such as fuel and air tanks, a life raft, a tender, and maybe a couple of Submarine Tom's minisubs.

[PanAmMan]

Originally Posted by capt vimes

that's not gonna to work!

in case of a collision you will most probably have your 'cracks' on the topside of the hull making water dripple or flood in at these places and any air you are adding from a compresed air-tank is going to stream out those leaks immidately... you will make a lot of bubbles but you will not be able to 'keep' or 'maintain' any air inside the hull...

if the hull is broken on the topsides or at least above the 50% hull-line you are always referring to - simply adding air will not keep the water out...
water is denser than air and where water is coming in... air is escaping a lot faster!
it IS an option if the damage is BELOW the 50% hull-line - so you have an sealed of and airtrapping bubble above - adding compressed air will even push any already incomed water as far down as where the cracks are...

but in general i think that if the hull of a submarine is breached you have 2 options:
- seal it of IMMIDATELY or
- leave the craft ASAP

The inside of the concrete sub has a plastic bag (50%) half shell that will not be damaged by the collision and will retain the air pocket in the presence of "fine cracks".

I have seen the effects of collisions with submerged concrete structures and not surprisingly they almost always do better that the surface ship hitting them!

[PanAmMan]

Originally Posted by Dave Gudeman

Hi, PanAmMan, I've been lurking on these forums for several weeks and just decided to join in order to reply to this thread .

The idea of having the exit hatch below the mid-line is surprising to me. Are you expecting passengers to crawl through a horizontal tunnel to enter and exit the sub? That's going to limit this sub pretty much to men under the age of 35 and women under 25. Older people just won't do that. We have our dignity to think of, you know .

Can't you solve the safety concern with pressure hatches? And don't you want pressure hatches anyway for safety at depth? If you have a breach at 200', the fact that the breach is below the mid-line is not going to help, but if you had three compartments separated by pressure hatches, you could evacuate the breached compartment, close the hatches, and keep 2/3 of the sub dry. This also gives you a lot more time to decide what to do because you aren't sitting around in hypothermia-producing water while breathing bends-producing high-pressure nitrogen. You even have a good chance of avoiding evacuation altogether and saving the sub. Even a sub with one flooded compartment is probably safer than a life raft.

Here is a proposal on how to do pressure chambers in concrete: instead of pouring one cylinder, poor three spheres. Join the spheres in a line with steel pressure hatches between and poor a heavy concrete backbone below and a lighter one above the line of spheres. In addition, one of the end chambers has an exit hatch going up and the chamber at the other end has an exit hatch going down. Both external hatches have the extra layer of backbone concrete for safety, and no matter what chamber is flooded, you can get to one of the hatches.

Of course, this isn't a very hydrodynamic shape, but I think you should be thinking in terms of a superstructure anyway. No one wants to spend all their time cooped up in a pressure hull and you need an exit that is far enough above the water to open the hatch without waves swamping the sub. How about a fiberglass superstructure with a large flat deck that rides a few feet above the water when the sub is at the surface? In effect, it turns your submarine into a SWASH (Small Waterplane Area Single Hull) when at the surface. You want to be able to pilot from above, especially for navigating in traffic and for docking. The dings and stresses of the dock would go against the fiberglass instead of the concrete, and for minor collisions, you wouldn't have to worry about cracks in the concrete because the fiberglass would absorb the impact.

The superstructure would also allow you to carry things outside the pressure hull such as fuel and air tanks, a life raft, a tender, and maybe a couple of Submarine Tom's minisubs.

Possibly, but you can think even simpler!

You should think of a sub like a surface boat in reverse e.g. the water containment walls extend from the top toward the bottom instead of the bottom toward the top as in a surface boat. No hatches required to prevent flooding in the "other" compartments.

By the way the surface hatch tube extends vertically from the "top" of the sub to > 50% down. You enter and exit like any sub via a vertical ladder. The vertical tube is "Open" at the bottom.

The plastic bag liners prevent cracks in one "zone" from leaking air in another. not to mention it would take a hell of a wallop to breach both!

My design has 60% of the livable space "above" the vertical hatch tube. That means you go down first to go up the exit ladder.

Most of the volume in the "bottom 50%" equipment areas displace water so there is almost no change in buoyancy when flooded.

The 50% above the hatch tube line volume is calculated to maintain positive buoyancy even when flooded with the hatch open at 40'.

Bellow 40' the automatic make up air system would have to add air to maintain positive buoyancy. The automatic buoyancy system is just a simple float valve that ensures that air is released into the buoyancy space until the water line drops to the point of assured positive buoyancy.

As the sub rises, and the air expands, it will push the water out of the sub until it reaches the height of the vertical hatch tube. This automatically minimizes the occupants exposure to pressure as the sub self rescues to the surface.

[PanAmMan]

Originally Posted by Gannet

PanAmMan

Since I notice that you live in the USA

Did you checked out the following to ensure you are compliant with the Regulations?

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/NVIC/pdf/1993/n5-93.pdf

Also, could you keep us abreast of your progress, problems, or lessons-learned

Thanks in Advance

If your familiar with that doc you know it basically says, if we ain't seen it before its going to take time! And were going to give it to the guy who still thinks airplanes will never work!

By the way, there is a spec for concreet under sea habitability. It is used to qualify every concreet offshore platform with "dry" legs extending below 30'. Belive it or not it's from the coast guard!

I even looked at the CG licensed "moveable" platforms as the core of the 'standards' that are proven. Might have to get the sub certified class "H" in Louisiana though!

Think private, 6 or less passengers total. class "H"

[PanAmMan]

Originally Posted by psubber

You have seriously misrepresented PSUBS.ORG and are also promoting much more complex design than necessary. PSUBS has over 12 years of email discussions archive on the website covering all kinds of topics including reasons why most of the ideas you are presenting here are illegitimate.

KISS in terms of collision avoidance means don't dive in heavy traffic areas, and if you do, have a surface boat with you displaying a dive flag so that other vessels stay clear.

If you aren't fabricating according to ABS or ASME standards, then you are experimenting in an area that is extremely unforgiving. Neither ABS or ASME will certify a concrete sub. Read about Seaker100 on PSUBS.ORG to find out what can happen with a failure at only 30 feet.

Don't reinvent the wheel.

Hmmm "illegitimate" maybe you could be specific about which ideas and why? Please try to do some homework as many of the "ideas" i have presented are in use today in submerged man rated structures and autonomous vehicles.

But i do agree the world below the waves is a very unforgiving one.

One is none,
two is too few,
and three will get you home!

Surface = Safety (for civilians anyway)

Unfortunately metal military subs do not have the luxury of taking the simple route. They must be stealthy and deadly. Sometimes to their operators.

Thanks for the feedback.
Hopefully we will get some details???

[Externet]

Cheap, half a million, everything included :

http://www.projectboats.com/whiskeysub.html

[tugboat]

panamman- i had the very same philosphy- keep it simple...i spent two years working out my systems for a 51.5 ft c-sub with an 8 ft dia. skipjack replica(its really easy to buy the 1/245(?) model and use it to take off the lines!!)designed for cruising. all with off the shelf parts--i had the hull and systems designed, and i was very confident about them. cheaply!!- about 12k to 13k all inclusive!

in fact i have many posts on psubs, you might like to read since im an advocate of concrete subs. - yes psubs -the site that you said deals with already pertinent but redundant info- anyway i had all the systems worked out--my safety system was the simplest going- dont get into a problem by using responsible digilance and common sense.

anyway- I know of Mr Ellmers ideas which seems to me where your drawing influences from-and i have ones of my own in the design category- anyway -i was just getting ready to build- got my diesel, got the 900 gpm pump used to pump the ballast(2000 gals in about two minutes i might add!) and my sub was a positive displacement type too, using bow planes fitted with high performance seals for around 75.00 each....the problems are these: how to seal the shaft without leaks, and the size of the sub itself. have you ever dove in a sub?...or a confined space?..have you ever been locked up in a small space for even a few hours?...its not pleasant- this is a real issue i had-
in the end i would have not enjoyed the experience.

i will point out now, that many people here do not want to see someone succeed using concrete and intuitively designed and simplified off the shelf parts and systems because the consumerist capitalist agenda has brainwashed the majority into believing there is only one way -and that way is by shelling out submarine-displacement sized sums of money for tests and naval architects, and electronics ad infinitum, and using only the strictest guidelines and scientific approach- ppffff bollocks!!

so why do people dislike a success in this area? why do they always fight you tooth and nail pull thier hair out- dogmatically screaming out loud that you are wrong!! that you cannot possibly succeed?! -...to convince you that thiers is the only way and you will surely die or fail if you continue on this heretical and doomed path of rebellion by building a concrete sub?


and in fact they will be greatly relieved and joyous if you dont-...why???
very simple-cuz then they can say they were right!! why again? because then thier reality is vindicated..a reality which society will try to perpetuate, a reality that mediocre minds have known for their enitire lifetimes because they were afraid to step out of the comfort zones and takes risks for fear of what the "monster" might say!!- cuz its been drilled into them so much that "it cant possibly work" that you are crazy to try- that, they believe, there are no other alternatives and nothing can work but conventional tried and proven mothods...these minds belong to people who would stand in the way of anything new. anything that can hold us shackled to the conventional-- in short thier reality gets challenged!!- they are terrified that what they have been told and then believed likely without question, might not be true after all- that things may not be as they think! .i.e that an amateur designer or builder, can for actually less money than a yacht - have a far surperior vessel.

you see then the question then must get asked: "why did i pay 200 000 for my yacht when i could have had a sub?" this scares the bejeezuz out of people- so its natural to resist change by people on here who are scared to death that - you just might be on to something and omg that things might change. and now they are 50 yrs old and it took them this long to learn that- perhaps they they could have done something really awesome too!

nutshell proverb: like the old saying goes- "dont let nuthin' but fear and common sense stop you from doing what you love"

so they apply strategies to convert you- by trying to use engineering principles and jargon- going to the textbooks, quoting failures, etc, all in an attempt to debunk your ideas- this is also to satisfy thier ego, and they try to drag your dreams away from you-

but believe me when i say they cant know any more than we can how, things will turn out- just like they said heavier than air vehicles would never fly- etc.

is it a risk??.of course! anything we do in life thats worth something is a risk and what would life be without risks???..why do people climb everest? because they can! and some die trying--but we all gotta go sometime right?.

however, having said all that- and trust me- im all for your success, the practical realities of being submerged for me, made me stop my project in the end even though my systems were simple and cheap-

you see there has to be certain things designed into any civil sub. when you try to design these things sometimes they end up getting more complicated. things that seem like they could work - dont. things that dont work do!
etc etc. but the main thing is...under the water in a sub is like being buried alive... and unless your really comfortable in confined spaces or have the money to build a giant civil sub( which btw then requires more complexities- and this grows exponentially with the size of the sub as does the cost), then you will build it small... so unless you enjoy going into small diameter tunnels for kicks, your going to feel slightly claustrophobic-

in my experience, id say the most reasonable practical diameter for c-subbing is 8 ft. unless you have 600 ton cranes at your disposal and yes ive looked that up too-the costs to move the c-sub are big! they require deep pockets. so i developed a method for a ferro cement sub design that involves layering the hull thickness and being affordable to do without cranes.
and at 8 ft diameter , you still need a foot of dia for your space for fixed ballast even with 6 inch c-walls. that leaves seven feet- toes to head. if you are 5 ft 10- you dont have much headroom- and this tends to make things claustrophobic. remember you still have the ballast tanks, which must be emptied to bring the subs draft to operational drafts in shallower ports, fuel space living area, machinery etc etc. and count on at least 2000 gallons for ballast water in order to have a movable water line.
so herin lies the problem for me- size. But if you can deal with the claustrophobic feeling then i say --cool! tell me how it works out..

btw please ask me any technical questions- i have solved them to be satisfied for my needs. i may be able to offer some direction.
pm me for any questions - two heads are better than one....
cheers!

[tugboat]

Originally Posted by wardd

what if your hit by a 90000 ton tanker with 200"' of draft would ipb handle that?

Hey Ward!

may i please ask what vessel exists with 200 feet of draught? thats funny...
more like 100ft draft on ULCC class tankers(and thats even pushing it)would be about the deepest i know of...well not yet anyway... maybe you know something i dont?

no offense --just found that a buit humorous.

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by PanAmMan

The inside of the concrete sub has a plastic bag (50%) half shell that will not be damaged by the collision and will retain the air pocket in the presence of "fine cracks".

I have seen the effects of collisions with submerged concrete structures and not surprisingly they almost always do better that the surface ship hitting them!

The plastic bag will contain the same ambient pressure as the outside water. Plus the sub will instantly lose buoyancy as the volume of air is reduced by the application of pressure. Result: increase in depth, greater pressure, nitrogen narcosis and if try to emerge from sub to escape to surface the bends and/or embolism in the lung or other place.

[dskira]

I am sorry, but for a dry submarine the thread title is impossible.

The title should be IITMCV
Which means: It Is The Most Complicate Vessel

SSS can be for a wet sub, because you can buy the components of the shelf.

I suggest to be very cautious when designing a sub, and to go for a while on one will help a lot to comprehend some of the problems a designer will be confronted.
It take a lot of time and money to succeed.
But still, the submarine is the more appealing vessel to the imagination. The shape, the history, the mystic make them irresistible. They are like the tugboat, the quintessential representation of the real tough and agile vessel.
Who never dreamed of a tugboat? Or a submarine?

Daniel

[hoytedow]

More points for dskira, somebody. I must spread reputation first.

[tugboat]

dskira- that was very well put! i love them both too--in fact it was really hard to decide which i love more...the raw power and functional beauty of a tugboat especially the general types with the beautiful sweep of the sheer and the plumb sides and plumb bow, and the prop wash when working lines at the stern on the bight or the beauty of a submarines diving...
call me over-optimistic but i believe in a 1atm sub that is cheaply and easily built... and using mostly off the shelf parts...it can be done..it may take a while..but its possible..anything is possible with the minds ability to understand and use simple solutions to complex problems.

[dskira]

Originally Posted by tugboat

dskira- that was very well put! i love them both too--in fact it was really hard to decide which i love more...the raw power and functional beauty of a tugboat especially the general types with the beautiful sweep of the sheer and the plumb sides and plumb bow, and the prop wash when working lines at the stern on the bight or the beauty of a submarines diving...
call me over-optimistic but i believe in a 1atm sub that is cheaply and easily built... and using mostly off the shelf parts...it can be done..it may take a while..but its possible..anything is possible with the minds ability to understand and use simple solutions to complex problems.

I don't think you are over-optimistic, you know what you want and you put your heart to it. And at the end of the day you will make it work, with patience and concentration.
The detail, is very important. Take always the worth case scenario, take nothing for granted, test yourself the componants.
Know the weight of every little piece comming in the sub, know its position, then recalculate and compere.
Take all calculations twice, reverse the methode, compere.
Take a close look at the midget sub of WWII, they are a source of interresting design.

Daniel

[Submarine Tom]

Tugboat,

You seem to have missed the entire point of this thread.

Please, get it back on track.

-Tom