these turbine alternaters are easy to make

In Bostons post above - the first video below : "...folks have been getting pretty creative with these things..." - - is pretty close to it... Sweedish / Dutch or German???

 

there are some great sites for engines
I found one for $2,000 is 200 hp and 1050 ft/lbs
at 600 lbs preasure and 1/2 gallon a minute
if you didnt have the ocean handy
it would never work
same company offer's the DIY plans for the boiler that I already have on the way
I need two boilers to run full tilt

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=15&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pioneer.net%2F~carlich&ei=MJHdSeb-GIPOMtDPtdYN&usg=AFQjCNHm8kNx0I569q1slRfLvlWxDuCxKg&sig2=JhQJGHl6WFO74gRnBMk2Rw

 

Are you now talking of steam generation or use as in an engine driven by steam? remember that is 1.9 litres/minute pure water you must make and convert to superheated steam (114 litres/hour - that is about half a barrel - need a AU$25000 RO-watermaker for that... and how much in wood pellets/hour?

 

thing boils salt water and all the calculations for fuel consumption are in the thread
there is a devise specifically to remove the residues

 

and the other biomas in the salt water? Oh well lets hope you are right if you apply this to the final product - just playing "devils advocate" to ensure all bases are covered...

 

the one Im calculating at the moment is how this thing ended up displacing 42 tons

engine 700
boilders say 1000 each
drive train 500
gensets 1000
wood 7000 bd feet
white oak 4.2 lbs/ board foot
red ceder 2 lbs
cherry 3.25 lbs
for an average of 3.1something
all told 21000 lbs or 10.5 tons wood
seems like it should end up weighing ~20 tons

so how in the world does it end up displacing 42 tons

 

Re-do with a fresh sheet of paper... - You may have hit on the reason that option has not proliferated?.....

 

no I think I got the displacement calculation at least close enough
its when I check the weight of the hull that things seem off
there are three basic kinds of wood going into this thing with each being approximately 1/3 of the ttl and the average weight per board foot of about 3.1 lbs
the hull takes about 7000 board feet
even if I screwed that number up a bunch at 10,000 board feet there would still only be about 30,000 pounds of lumber in the hull and thats not even close to the 85,176 lbs estimated displacement
no way that boilers engines and drive train along with all the kitchen stuff and the gensets and bla bla bla make up for that discrepancy unless there is ballast in the system that I dont know about
so Im doing something wrong and its not got to do with the power source but either my displacement calculation or my estimate of wood used or there being some ballast

 

get a copy of freeship or delftship (free versions on GPL licence or the russian equivalent http://freeship-plus.pisem.su/indexEN.html but use "firefox" and set it to stop unauthorised stuff being installed - I use linux so am not really bothered by stuff trying to infect windows... all three are essentially the same but will not export to each other and most on this net use freeship 2.6 which may be available for download from SourceForge.net these will help you draw the waterlines and automatically give you displacement.... just get the lines to look similar with key distances as your markers.... the drawing and other scales can be preset to metric or "imperial" - learning this will keep you off the net for a couple of months

 

well Ive got the lines so all I need to do is put in the parameters I guess
Ill check it out but when I check it against other ships of similar design and length they are all in the ball park of that 42 tons displacement

 

Counter-Rotating Pairs

As noted by Boston above, and in some of the literature I had accumulated (can't find at the moment), the suggesting to counteracting the gyro effect is to build the flywheels in counter-rotating pairs.

Multiple pairs of smaller units could cancel out gyro effects

 

Some years ago I offered an idea of a spinning flywheel inside a keel to offer stability. The idea was poo poo'd now that someone else suggests flywheels being counteractive to motion it seems to be attracting credibility.

 

unfortunately in many cases when a significant change or advancement is proposed its often ridiculed usually by people who have a life of experience in the field
there are countless examples of this in science
I actually didnt propose a flywheel inside a keel
just a pair of flywheels storing solar energy as apposed to batteries
but I kinda like the idea at least for wave piercers

so I calculated the displacement of a semi displacement hull by multiplying the length at wl beam at wl and draft and thendividing that by 2 ( which was my guess as to what % the average hull section took up in a section of equal but square proportions at the largest section
it may if anything have been slightly larger but for argument sakes it seems about right
yet it does not (no mater how you slice it) add up to the weight of the boats components
so what are the chances they ballasted this boat?

 

Do you really think you can safely store more power in flywheels for any length of time, and have it any more efficient or cost effective than a chemical battery? You would also have to put up with the noise of them, and I'm sure they would be far more costly and hard to repair than swapping out old cells from your battery.

 

Boston, draw the stations on graph paper and count the squares for each station (BELOW THE WATERLINE) that will give you the cross section area, then multiply that by the distance to the next station then add those volumes together after adjusting for truncation in the hullform (a quick and dirty way would be to average the area between those two stations then multiply by that distance between them for the volume displaced there...

A bit slow and tedious, but lacking the number-crunching capacity of a cad program, the easiest way out... I did it in the early stages of my modeling research as a secondary check to confirm other results... - - the model in my gallery had a design displacement of 6.5 tonnes but the model equivalency was nearer 11.5 (built too heavy)...