[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] concrete submarine - i did it back in 1994 - worked perfectly
I am curious about viewports and hatches in your hull.
I want to build an underwater "habit" (read house).
And
have looked into quite a few materials. The problem
with
concrete has been related to view-ports promarilly. I
haven't been able to find any information on that. If
you have any further information of this, or other
construction methods, you certainly have my attention.
Warren.
--- diagroto@ibague.cetcol.net.co wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am Wilfried Ellmer and i recently did a search
> engine search on my name and
> found it connected to a discussion on this board
> about concrete submarine
> hulls.
> This explains why i answer now to a discussion that
> took place here some 3
> years ago.
>
> One of the questions asked was "did everyone a hull
> or sub like this" .
>
> Yes i did one (in 1994) it was: 9 m long 2.5 meter
> diameter 18cm wall
> thickness, form of a blimp 15 tons wihtout ballast
> 20tons with ballast.
>
> I also did earlier a smaller hull of 2m long and 0.7
> m diameter to test the
> concept.
>
> Both hulls where converted in fully functioal subs
> and i personally had a lot
> of dives and fun in those two subs.
>
> Fact that i am still writing proves the validity of
> concept.
>
> Unfortunatly the concept was so new back in 1994
> that i could not find anyone
> interested to discuss or make a projekt with me.
>
> So let me answer from practikal point of view some
> questions that came up here:
>
> Can you transport a hull like this?
>
> Yes i transported the 9m hull on a truck from
> innsbruck where i built it to
> lake Atter where i dived with it (some 5 hours) did
> not break, not leak, no
> damage.
> it was stapled on wood - no special transport thing
> - impacts that occur on a
> truck will not affect a hull like this.
>
> Will it crack when you hammer on it ?
>
> This hull had a 18 cm thick concrete walls curved in
> 3 dimensions - and
> reinforced by 5mm steel bar net all 5 cm - this is
> similar to a bunker wall,
> or to a bridge - if you hammer it will it break ? -
> of course not.
>
> Will it stand hydrostatic pressure ?
>
> Just think of hoover dam, or submarine tunnels, or
> oil drilling platforms, -
> is concrete standing hydrostatic pressure ? - of
> course for many decades
> without any notable change.
>
> Do you need non steel reinforcement?
>
> - no in a 5cm or more thickness concret wall steel
> bars are perfectly
> protected.
>
> Will it stand changing load from waves ?
> Is concret standing changing load on bridges - of
> course ! - and in by far
> more sever conditions. Or in buildings under erver
> changing wind pressure.
>
> Is building the hull a tecnical problem ?
>
> handling a 18cm thick ship hull is always a problem
> - just imagine welding
> steel plates of 18cm !!! - or forming them as a
> sphere or streamlined blimp.
> (with 3 dimensional curves). I could do it in a
> backyard with concrete,
> (without having bubbles and having reinforcement
> where it belongs) - i doubt
> that i could weld or form 18cm steel plates or alu
> in a backyard.
> This is a task that is only (if ever) handled in
> battleship construction.
> What you can do with concrete is incredible strong
> thick walls on relative
> small subs - this has nothing to do with ferrocemnt
> as used in yachting (iron
> mashing and plastering on) - this is forming
> concrete in the way as it is used
> in tunnels or in radio towers with continous forming
> that makes a little part
> every day.
> Had patented some of this stuff...
>
> Do you need a special covering - double hull etc:
>
> No - just use what is proved in tunnel or dam
> building it will work excellent
> in hydrostatic pressure for decades as it does in
> dams and tunnels.
>
> Do it only work for big subs ?
> No - had done 2m sub with 5cm wall thickness and 9m
> sub with 18cm wall
> thickness both worked excellent.
>
> How can you test concrete ?
>
> How do they test dams or bridges or tunnels - x
> raying every cm? , by using
> paleontolgy equipment? (as a discussion suggests) ?
>
> I had a practical approach deep test at 150m (was
> deepest site i could find in
> the lake) and considered it save therefore to dive
> with 50m.
>
> If you get obvious material changes over time
> (rusting of steel reinforcement)
> visible (new) cracks etc...yust do pressure test
> again and keep it 1/3 in
> normal use this should be save.
> (by the way...did not get any rusting, or cracks
> during 15 years of use) - So
> is it done in dams, bridges, pressure vessels,
> concrete pressure hulls of
> nuclear plants etc. - periodic testing with overload
> - new testing if doubths
> about structural integrity come up at visual
> inspection.
>
> No need to predict destruction depth exactly with
> complicated
> methodes...doesn't work anyhow - not even for navy
> steel hulls - as example of
> treasure accident shows.
>
> A wall thickness of 18cm on a 9m boat gives you a
> calculated destruction depth
> far below 1000m (normal concrete without any
> special) you can keep it so far
> above that in normal dive operations that it will be
> save - no matter - if
> anything like bubbles or cracks gives you a little
> additional weakness.
> All concrete on all dams, tunnels buildings, drill
> islands etc. have bubbles
> and cracks - do they collaps ? - of course not!
>
> What is the real problem of constructing a sub or
> habitat with concrete ?
>
> Shipyards are not familiar with this material, and
> those who are familiar with
> it (tunnel engineers) do not build ships or subs.
>
> Are there unsolved problems?
>
> All problems are solved for decades all is available
> but nobody applies it on
> subs.
> I did it - it worked excellent - had a lot of fun -
>
>
>
> If anyone wants to discuss or suggest me a
> project...please go on.
>
> Wilfried Ellmer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com