instead of smash with big ice-breaker, how about saw and remove ice?

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by Squidly-Diddly, Oct 3, 2020.

  1. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 9,095
    Likes: 653, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    I take it that no nuclear icebreaker ever went to the Antarctic, maybe not allowed by treaty.
     
  2. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 14,605
    Likes: 709, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Absolute nonsense. All submerged objects have buoyancy. Whether they float or sink depends on the density of the object and the fluid. There is no such thing as a percent buoyancy. Back to school my friend.
     
  3. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 6,644
    Likes: 650, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    That's correct for most of those ice breakers.
     
    brendan gardam likes this.
  4. Squidly-Diddly
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 1,679
    Likes: 108, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 304
    Location: SF bay

    Squidly-Diddly Senior Member

    you are right, but AFAIK these big new icebreakers are big enough they don't rise, they break the ice by pushing it down without much riding up. Maybe we just ain't seeing them operating at max thickness. I do remember seeing old video of icebreaker riding up on ice, breaking it, then backing away for another run. Obviously that was a much slower process than claimed 9knots of new Russian ship.

    My general point is rather than smashing the ice into lots of needlessly small pieces, you might save energy and be able to use simple cheap mechanical "surgical" methods to make only min amount of cuts/breaks to then be able to (again with min effort) shove and place the ice out of the way. Like busting up concrete or stucco. You quickly figure out rather than pulverize into something you can shovel, you want to only cut into largest size you can move to wherever its needs to be moved, even if moving takes special techniques.
     
    brendan gardam likes this.
  5. Squidly-Diddly
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 1,679
    Likes: 108, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 304
    Location: SF bay

    Squidly-Diddly Senior Member

    percent bouyancy at DuckDuckGo https://duckduckgo.com/?q=percent++bouyancy&t=ffab&atb=v208-1&ia=web
    I always recommend people use a search engine before contradicting me, to save embarrassment.
    In fact, I recommend it to anyone before contradicting anyone is such manner, again to save embarrassment.
    BTW, did you ever find example of American oil companies selling gasoline at the pump way out of spec with harmful over-percentage of alcohol mix that you were claiming? Because such info would be worth a lot of money.
     
  6. Clarkey
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 132
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: UK

    Clarkey Senior Member

    I believe it is because the reactors are raw water cooled and they cannot navigate through the tropics without overheating.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2020
  7. Squidly-Diddly
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 1,679
    Likes: 108, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 304
    Location: SF bay

    Squidly-Diddly Senior Member

    maybe some Treaty against Oil and Gas drilling, plus these nuke icebreakers normally bust ice for a convoy of Russian ship traveling from one ice bound Russian coastal city to another, so no real reason to due Antarctic runs.
     
  8. Ike
    Joined: Apr 2006
    Posts: 2,431
    Likes: 305, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1669
    Location: Washington

    Ike Senior Member

    This is a misleading statement. The main problem icebreakers have is with their propellers "milling" ice. The hulls are designed specifically to avoid getting ice into the props, but it still happens. This has been the major problems with the Polar Star and Polar Sea, and is the reason the Polar Sea has been out of commission since 2010. The variable pitch propellers are so expensive Congress simply hasn't funded replacing them, and the Polar Star is so old the Coast Guard has been using the Polar Sea for spare parts. (by the way I worked on the design of these back in 70 and 71 doing weight and moment studies on them while I was at Lockheed Shipbuilding in between enlistments. Now you know why they are having problems. LOL)

    Just to inject something here. There are various classes of icebreakers, light, medium, and heavy. They are rated by the thickness of ice they can break while still managing to move ahead. Yes they do break ice by riding up on it and using their weight to break it. The backing and ramming seen in movies is exactly that. They back off and move ahead at full throttle to ride up onto the ice. It's not as noticeable on the heavy breakers like the Polar class because those ar big ships, over 400 feet.

    The Healy is a medium class breaker and is used mainly for oceanographic research in the artic because it can't break as thick ice as the Polar class. On the Great Lake they have an icebreaker, the Makinaw, which is rated as heavy but not really. Its adequate for the Great Lakes and can double as a buoy tender.

    A Coast Guard breaker had to be rescued a few years back by a Russian breaker because it got into ice too thick for it while assisting a ship that was stuck.

    The ships that go into the artic during ice "free" periods are mainly tankers going to the north slope. Some have icebreaking bows, but that's just to avoid damage. They aren't really ice breakers.

    PS: If you really want to know about icebreaker design, talk to the Finns. They are probably the worlds foremost builders of icebreakers.. The Coast Guard a few years back proposed leasing icebreakers from Finland but Congress wouldn't fund it.
     
  9. jehardiman
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 2,804
    Likes: 366, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 2040
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA

    jehardiman Senior Member

    There are lots of things in this thread, but it is beginning to seem like a fishing expedition. If you really want the answer as to why...you need to get access to the laboratories that do these things. Millions have been spent for tiny snippets of good info, you should pay them for it.
     
  10. Squidly-Diddly
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 1,679
    Likes: 108, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 304
    Location: SF bay

    Squidly-Diddly Senior Member

    Now I'm thinking about 3 or more pizza cutter wheels that would score the ice to get reliable breaks on certain lines to create uniform sized blocks, then a special bow shape, maybe with powered spiked rollers, that would snap the scored ice and pull blocks under the bow, then eject them off to the sides, using upside down ramps that would sit under water, under the level of bottom of ice field and extend under the field about 1/2 of the ship's beam and cut width.
     
  11. Ike
    Joined: Apr 2006
    Posts: 2,431
    Likes: 305, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1669
    Location: Washington

    Ike Senior Member

    You are ignoring one of the main functions of icebreaker hull design. They have round bottoms so they will be pushed up if the ice traps them. If they can't rise up then the hull will be crushed. All those protrusion below the water line will impede that.
     
    brendan gardam likes this.
  12. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 9,095
    Likes: 653, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    I'm going right out on a limb here, and propose that these nuclear icebreakers are not a gimmick, or a chest-beating PR exercise, or there to scare polar bears, but just to allow shipping traffic to continue in the winter. :)
     
  13. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 9,095
    Likes: 653, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    Interesting, thanks.
     
  14. Ike
    Joined: Apr 2006
    Posts: 2,431
    Likes: 305, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1669
    Location: Washington

    Ike Senior Member

    Yes. but. There are a few Russian ports on their north coast that need to be kept open for shipping, but they are also home to naval units. One in particular is home to a submarine base. Russia has 41 icebreakers. Most are diesel, but if I recall (I'll have to look it up) six are nukes. But the main reason for all this activity is more geopolitical. Russia is actively trying to claim the resources, mainly oil, on the Arctic continental shelf, even in areas that are nowhere near their coast. With climate warming, more and more areas in the Arctic are opening up, and there is a real scramble going on for who gets the resources. Even China is getting into the act. But whoever does, has to be able to enforce that with actual floating assets, which Russia has, and we don't. Even the US navy is finally waking up and talking about deploying assets to the Arctic, but they have very little experience, or assets that are equipped for the environment. Only the US Coast Guard does at this point (and I might add that Canada has some as well,) This has been cussed and discussed at length in military publications, mostly US Naval Institute Proceedings.
     
    bajansailor and brendan gardam like this.

  15. Squidly-Diddly
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 1,679
    Likes: 108, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 304
    Location: SF bay

    Squidly-Diddly Senior Member

    Thats why I'm throwing out ideas for:

    1)ice breaker that can go through much thicker ice, not just the "milk run" between two coastal cities at certain times of year.
    2)ice breaker that might be much slower, but would be cheaper, able to be fabricated using existing ship and simple steel and proven mechanical, but is also more maneuverable and able to get going after dead stop and big freeze. Something to work around the drill site.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. Squidly-Diddly
    Replies:
    35
    Views:
    1,617
  2. Squidly-Diddly
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    915
  3. Squidly-Diddly
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,815
  4. hungryhorse
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    4,764
  5. Squidly-Diddly
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    3,087
  6. damies
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    22,785
  7. saltydog123
    Replies:
    187
    Views:
    92,229
  8. john zimmerlee
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,229
  9. kilbysg
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,416
  10. Edward Tafoya
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    791
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.