[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Another response from Hunley archaeologist.



Hi Stan.
 
You wrote...."The Hunley had a pressure hull"
 
Just because you build a sub with a strong hull able to withstand pressure, does not mean that you cannot use that hull as an ambient hull. You could build a thick hull out of steel
 
with reinforcement hoops and still use it as an ambient hull if you wanted to. Having a pressure hull does not preclude using it as an ambient hull. Just having a pressure hull does not
 
mean it has to or is necessarily being used as a pressure hull until you CLOSE OFF any means for water to enter the sub's interior. This is the key thing I overlooked with the Hunley.
 
 
You wrote...."I don't see anything ambient about the Hunley's design".
 
I may well be wrong in thinking that the Hunley is a COMPLETELY ambient sub, but she does have attributes and qualities of being ambient in her design.
 
Let's analyze  them.
 
1. An ambient sub allows water to enter its INTERIOR to dive. The Hunley did this with her open top and open to the hull interior ballast tanks.
 
2. The water pressure entering the sub's interior when an ambient sub dives, compresses the atmosphere in the sub's interior just as it did with the Hunley.
 
3. An ambient sub uses air to force water out of the sub's INTERIOR to surface, just as they did with the Hunley.
 
 
 
So, to address your statement, it is clear that just having a pressure hull does not necessarily preclude being ambient, and the Hunley had at least 3 design features of an ambient sub. This is what confused me and made me think she was COMPLETELY ambient.
 
In looking at it very closely I see where I was incorrect in thinking she was COMPLETELY ambient. I realize my mistake and now believe she was a hybrid with features of both an ambient and a pressure hull sub. 
 
 
Here's where I was incorrect in thinking she was COMPLETELY ambient.
 
1. I did not take into account that the Hunley could CLOSE OFF her ballast tank's valves and thus prevent outside water from freely coming in without just using air pressure to keep the water out. WHEN the ballast tank valves were CLOSED OFF
 
the Hunley SWITCHED from being an ambient sub (letting water into her hull INTERIOR and compressing her atmosphere), and became a pressure hull sub.
 
Ambient subs do not prevent the water coming in by a closing a valve like the Hunley did. They are ALWAYS open to the water coming in and keep it out by pressurized air pressure only. They have to use a pressurized air tank in order to do this.
 
Since the Hunley did not have pressurized air tanks she could not do this and deviated from what we consider to be ambient by being able to close off any water coming in by closing her ballast tank valves.
 
When she SWITCHED from ambient operation to pressure holding by closing her ballast tank valves, she became a pressure hull even though her atmosphere was compressed and no longer at 1 atm.
 
 
 
Discussing the Hunley has taught me a lot. I have never seen a sub with ballast tanks quite like her's. Also these discussions have taught me that so called 1 atm subs are frequently not 1 atm and I think we need a new term to catagorize
 
submarines and submersibles that more accurately reflects their true interior atmospheric pressure.
 
 
 
I invite anyone to disprove that the Hunley did not have the 3 attributes of an ambient sub I listed above, or to disprove that just because a hull CAN BE a pressure hull, that it also cannot be an ambient hull and switch between being ambient to pressure holding.
 
 
Kindest regards,
 
Bill Akins.
 
 
  
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2005 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Another response from Hunley archaeologist.

Another name for a "1 atm" submarine is a "pressure hull" submarine.  The Hunley had a pressure hull.  I don't see anything "ambient" about her design.
 
Stan