Submarine Project

Wellmer your boyfriend Heki is not Swedish, and a scholar in Swedish to whom I show his post told me he is of a German country, or Austrian, not a Swedish.
Please leave the forum.
Your attitude has been despicable.
Daniel

 

Mr rwatson- ok- fair enough i undestand your points now- perhaps i misunderstood because i thought your issues were with the actual technical side of it. i still think its going to eventually work red tape, insurance or not...when i build my boats i don't insure them unless there are laws...but a private boat does not have to be insured. commercial yes. at least thats what i understand..im not an expert in maritime law.

Wellmer- im on your side- sorry others who may dislike that- i have my own reasons for taking sides too. i think that Wellmers success would be our success. it might even be a breakthrough for the common person who wants his own autonomy underwater. just my opinion.

then we all have more options .

 

dskira-lol ill take that as a compliment-(i think) but please clarify- do you mean my typing sucks?.(yeah i know im not a great typist and apologize if some of my ideas are fragamented since i lost some of the original ) or do you mean the tone of my writing is different form other posts i have done??
cuz the tone was meant to show my contempt at people who cannot have a little vision and feel some need to put someone down who is trying to accomplish something good in the world... and people have a choice here- they can try to make the world better by giving out positive feedback and ideas and constructive or they can choose to be jerks...why would anyone of intelligence choose the latter? seems many do- so im challenging it.

On other posts i probably have been all business- hence if you mean that my other posts have not been... hmmm passionate? i agree....this one is a bit personal for me as i dislike when people accuse others of things and resort to name calling , gossip,mockery and all thoseindirect forms of attack. etc.. (i can give you examples if need be)...


mostly- im here to find out some basic ideas about concrete sub constuction as i have my own project going and im unsure as to whether to start it now or let it die but mostly to get ideas and help on technical issues...

I think Wellmer belongs here and i think he should stay....ive learned more from Wellmer than from anyone else on here...and he has helped me in my learning curve more than he may know so--he should stay.
now thats totally my opinion...

so i have said what i need and my next posts will be technically related..


cheers

i hope everyone finds the boat(or sub) of their dreams

 

daniel- sorry it had to come to this--i dont get your anger at my opinion- now i understand why wellmer doesnt want to share his ideas..thanks for showing me why...perhaps your the one who should leave-

what is hilarious here is your hypocrisy- for example- your quote-

"This is an insult for all of us naval architect engineers, boat builder, shipbuilder, real submariners,..."
ok- here is the logic of this- since you cant possibly know all those people and how they ALL feel about my comment- maybe you should follow your own advice and speak for yourself just like you accused me of not doing right now?!!

 

Perhaps you get a point here, and yes I get a little hard on you. sorry about that I will temper myself next time.
What I said is: I know submarine, I was part of a design team, I dive with. It is not just a tube. It is a lot of competency so nobody DIE.
Wellmer went on the submarine blog telling stories which are completely lies.
I know a lot of naval architect, and submarine people.
Wellmer is just an insult for them.
Why? because he ask for investors and don't tell them they will die in his coffin.
He as NO idea how to design even the simplest component like a Kingston valve.(I see him Google to see what it is so he can come back with an answer)
I don't like snake oil salesman.
Sorry again
Daniel

 

Tugboat, I deleted my post against you.
It was no need.
Daniel

 

Whatever Wellmer. The other thread that got closed - and this one had very relevant questions that you or your boys didn't even try to address. You ignore ALL even slighty critical or technical question. Those were not throwing mud on you AT ALL. Of course some people have gotten a little more frustrated with your lack of straight up communication and have drawn rather logical conclusions.

I love fresh thinking and low end accessible ways of solving problems. I closely follow home made electric vehicle scene and think that there is a huge ignored resource in backyard engineering. Yet any "inventor" worth their salt has realistic view on the negatives too. You seem to ignore everything that isn't praising.

Just to be nice I will end my post in a non mudslinging way:


Wow - concrete submarine! That is so cool that you can make sizeable submarines that suit recreational budgets. I am sure there will be huge demand for underwater dwelling. Good luck - this is a great project.

Could you post those pictures again?

 

45 metres, then squish!

 

Paper Number 3011-MS
Title OCEAN IMPLOSION TEST OF CONCRETE (SEACON) CYLINDRICAL STRUCTURE
Authors Roy S. Highberg and Harvey H. Haynes, Civil Engineering Laboratory
Source

Offshore Technology Conference, 2-5 May , Houston, Texas
Copyright 1977. Offshore Technology Conference
Language English
Preview ABSTRACT

An ocean implosion test was conducted on a pressure-resistant concrete cylindrical structure to obtain the depth at implosion. The structure was a reinforced concrete cylinder with hemispherical end caps, twenty feet (6.1 m) in overall length, ten feet (3.05 m) in outside diameter, and 9.5 inches (241 mm) in wall thickness. The structure was near-neutrally buoyant having a positive buoyancy of 12,000 pounds (5.4 Mg) for a hull displacement of 85,000 pounds (38.5 Mg). The implosion depth of the cylinder was 4700 feet (1430 m). A predicted implosion depth, using an empirical design equation based upon past test results, was 16 percent less than the actual implosion depth.

INTRODUCTION

A pressure-resistant, reinforced concrete hull was constructed in 1971 as part of a Seafloor Construction Experiment, SEACON I. The structure was placed on the seafloor at a depth of 600 feet (180 m) for 10 months. Figure 1 shows the SEACON I hull prior to its ocean emplacement. Since its retrieval in 1972, it has been located in the open air about 150 ft. (50 m) from the ocean. In the summer of 1976, the structure was returned to the ocean for an ultimate load test, that is, the structure was lowered into the ocean until implosion.

SPECIMEN DESCRIPTION

The cylindrical structure was assembled from three precast, reinforced concrete sections. The straight cylinder section, 10.1 feet (3080 mm) in outside diameter by 10 feet (3050 mm) in length by 9.5 inches (241 mm) in wall thickness, was fabricated by United Concrete Pipe Corporation. The concrete hemisphere end-closures, 10.1 feet (3080 mm) in outside diameter by 9.5 inches (241 mm) in wall thickness, were fabricated in-house. Tolerances on the sections conformed to concrete pipe standards of not to exceed to ±0.75 inch (19 mm) for the inside diameter or minus 0.5 inch (13 mm) for the wall thickness.

Steel reinforcement in the amount of 0.70% by area was used in both the axial and hoop direction. Reinforcing bars of 0.6 inch (15 mm) diameter were employed throughout the structure. A double circular reinforcement cage was fabricated for each precast section; the concrete cover on the outside and inside reinforcing cage was 1 inch (25 mm). For the cylinder section, hoop rebars had a spacing of 27.25 inches (692 nm) and 31.25 inches (794 mm) for the inside and outside cages respectively.

The hemispherical end-closures were bonded to the cylinder section with an epoxy adhesive, no other attachment besides the epoxy bond was employed (Figure 2). The gap between the mating surfaces of the hemisphere and the cylinder was less than 0.13 inch (3 mm) for 75% of the contact area. Prior to epoxy bonding, the concrete surfaces were prepared by sandblasting and washing with acetone.

Source: http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=OTC-3011-MS&soc=OTC

 

People rarely regret failure; they almost invariably regret, not trying.

 

oh no - plenty of people regret failure my friend. They range from the frozen bodies of the failed antarctic explorer, to the charred remains of the Challenger astronauts.

Failure is expensive, its soul destroying, and it hurts alot of people around it.

Tugboat, re your comments "but a private boat does not have to be insured. commercial yes. at least thats what i understand..im not an expert in maritime law."

... to re-iterate a few points I have made over the years, being unable to insure an unusual craft can make life really difficult.

This imaginary conversation ..
W: "Hi, Columbia Heavy Crane and Boat moving Inc, can I get a quote to launch a 200 tonne concrete submarine please"

CHCB: "Um, sure ,thats not too heavy for us, but we need to be sure you are insured to cover risk to our employees"

W: "no, I cant get anyone to insure this sub, even for third party injury"

CHBC: "lets see if we can get insurance for you then, hold the line please ...... I am very sorry, but our insurance company has never covered this kind of structure, they dont even have actuarial table to cover it. They are worried that if the submarine is damaged on moving, it could be very expensive, and they dont even know if the structure is soundly engineered. They are even worried that if the sub failed during trials, it could be blamed on poor moving techniques. In fact, we are not sure how much support such an unusual structure requires etc etc ..... sorry we cant help"

In insuring more usual boats - there are really strict rules. If you cannot get 10million$ third party cover on a sailboat, you will not be allowed to berth at 90% or marinas and yacht clubs around the world.

Wellmer is really quick to copy and paste page after page of "technical" info, but apart from one small admission that he cant get insurance some months ago, he doesnt explain how he is going to address the "administrative" problems.

Personally, after all the schtick that Wellmer has gone through, he really deserves to get some success - and I personally hope we keep getting real news from the project, despite some really nasty and objectionable attitudes from other posters.

 

Failur is not an option in submarine, we are not talking stich and glue.

 

Clearly, this subject generated too much point less discussion over the "show-me" results, usually such high disparity ratio suggests the subject matter is either vaporware or it doesn't work (in total specs) as advertised. Lets wait for at least 3-5x successfull replication around the globe, onboard & offboard videos during submerging maneouver and dock/port related navigation. Interestingly enough, any similar diy or breakthrough related projects usually flood the internets with supporting material, daily build updates (photo-diaries) and what have you. However, this is still 99% forum/opinion/talk oriented, the rest is low res pictures and videos, my grandpa would be a better documentarist for such a project..

 

Absolutely.
It is always the man being the project who make the difference.
wellmer try to sell something which do not exist, he has no clue how to go behind the concrete envelop, which is nothing.
The problem is when willmer start asking for money for something he knows will be never working is not appropriate in a civilized country.
But when the object you sell can cause death, it is criminal.
I think wellmer is a narcissist sociopath. Why, because he can't listen or even acknowledge his shortcoming, he do not care what anybody think.
He has even the recourse to telephone intimidation, like the worst drug dealer will do.
And he tackle the most dangerous vessel ever invented by mankind.
He want money and fame, the rest is not in his agenda.
He already lie on a submarine blog, which was pretty insulting to the other member.
Daniel

 

Daniel- np--no offense taken...cheers!

rwatson... i prefer to remain open and optimistic. i do have to agree that insurance might be a hurdle. But then again i dont know much about it...my expertise lies in solving problems both technical and practical-cheraply and effectively--thats my specialized area and strong point...so i have a strong belief in my ability. thats why i think the c-sub is coming--maybe not mine, maybe or maybe not Wellmers- but i do believe recreational c-submarine yachting is going to happen...Wils take on the whale as a model is sound...and i doubt anyone can really effectively argue that...there truly is no long distance surface swimming animal...he makes some good points...ones i myself have thought of personally before i even knew about his work...this is why i support him...if it turns out he is not being honest--it will come out..in time..but i choose to think he is just like everyone on here--trying to chase a vision to and live the dream-

but like it or not- the affordable c-sub is coming its just a matter of when, how and by whom...its going to happen --as a alternative to a steel sub design just as ferro-cement has proven itself as an extremely effective and viable alternative (if done right) to a cruising hull on a sailboat or power boat

i think wellmer, and people like myself and others on here who have posted for submarine yachting as well as psubs and people who have actually built workable subs such as the UC3 Nautilus , the kraka etc, re: Peter madsen , Carsten Standfuss and many others..have paved the way for subs to be financially viable with cost effective off the shelf resources...

just my opinion...