Hi Rick,
Yes, the Keys are wonderful thank you (Hurricanes aside) I am very lucky here, as this is basically a giant backyard aquarium. I also very much appreciate your comments so allow me to respond to your questions in turn.
?Is this your first sub? Would you consider a two-person sub as a model/test platform first??
Yes, this would be the first. My idea may yet prove impractical, I have not yet done sufficient research (math) to rule it in or out yet and more on that in a bit. A smaller boat could very well end up being the main event but not as a test platform and here is my rational why.
I would never approach a project of this magnitude of my own fruition. I am sure that there are those who would approach my idea with some degree of skepticism but there is a method to my madness. For one thing I am not reinventing the wheel here. I am simply standing on the backs of those who have done the real work. You can make a wheel of stone and one of gold but you know it?s going to work because somebody did it before you. You just spent a little more time and effort and money on the gold one.
I know ambient pressure subs work, thank you Robert Boyle, the principles of S.C.U.B.A, thank you Jacques Cousteau, modern epoxy-ply boat building techniques, thank you Gougeon Brothers, Sam Devlin and others, electricity, the internal combustion engine?etc?you get the picture.
I have no doubt that in the distant future (if humanity survives itself) some intrepid homebuilder will have the honor of being the first to orbit the earth in a homebuilt spacecraft. No government grants, no teams of engineers, no multibillion dollar budget, just Charlie and his garage. But ?Charlie? will do so on the backs of the Wright Brothers, Robert Goddard, Wernher Von Braun, Burt Rutan, a host of others, and some other as yet unknown propulsion and materials geniuses.
?Sounds tlike the internal volume is huge. I'd forget ambient altogether and go one-atm. Compensating something like this will be a nightmare. Your air volumes will be massive - and to what end? If working with metal is uncomfortable for you, consider using wood for the one-atm. hull.?
Ah yes, and here is the potential deal killer! If I can?t carry enough air with sufficient reserve for safety, it?s a cooked goose! All of the other principles work and can be brought together, but this is the one that needs to be proven or disproved mathematically. I can charge air cylinders, (some nice fellow invented the engine driven air compressor, thank you too) but can I carry enough of those big bottles hidden away to make it work?
Someone at psubs once said something along the lines of ?What are you asking the design to do?? Well, my version of Nautilus as conceived is to be arguably the most unique cabin cruiser ever to be seen in Biscayne Bay with the following submerged capabilities.
#1 Dive duration of 30 minutes as a minimum to 1 hour maximum, 50? max, 2 aboard min.
#2 Underwater maneuverability and control sufficient to perform a 360 turn in either direction in order to settle the boat on the bottom in a controlled manner.
#3 Resurface
That?s it, the sum total of what I want the thing to be able to do. Her surface capability would far surpass what she could do as a sub. Just go down shallow and come back up safely and reliably.
A steel boat is way too heavy and aluminum?. well, it might as well be gold with the prices they want. The marine ply would be expensive enough. As for surface power I believe the rule is 2.5 x per 1,000 lbs of displacement to push a displacement hull at hull speed. The (.5) part is the reserve for fighting a head sea and wind, apparently any more than that is wasted horsepower. The underwater requirements for power are unknown to me at this time.
Thanks again
Joe
From: "Rick and Marcia" <empiricus@telus.net>
Reply-To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: Nemo's Nautilus Concept Plan
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:05:59 -0700
Hi, Joseph - read your post with interest. The touring concept has been a favourite of mine for a long time. The Keys are fantastic. I can see it now, sitting at anchor, pina colada in hand (or whomever), the sun setting, those pterodactal pelicans skimming the surface . . .
- Is this your first sub? Would you consider a two-person sub as a model/test platform first?
- IMHO, do not skimp on your propulsion. Better more than not enough. A vessel this size requires a LOT of propulsion, batts, etc. and that means a large genset.
- Sounds tlike the internal volume is huge. I'd forget ambient altogether and go one-atm. Compensating something like this will be a nightmare. Your air volumes will be massive - and to what end? If working with metal is uncomfortable for you, consider using wood for the one-atm. hull.
- Bringing the family along is a great idea. I remember one photo of a Victorian era sub with upholstered seats, wine glasses, etc. A real class act. One-atm.
RickVancouver----- Original Message -----From: Joseph PerkelSent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:29 AMSubject: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: Nemo's Nautilus Concept Plan************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears in our database because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages from our organization. If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the link below or send a blank email message to: removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an automated process and should be complete within five minutes of our server receiving your request. PSUBS.ORG PO Box 311 Weare, NH 03281 603-529-1100 ************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ ************************************************************************Ok someone asked me (Jim) where I?m going with this so here is the concept broken down by area so far. Group input is solicited and greatly appreciated.
As I read more and look into the subject, I can see that modern epoxy-ply boat building techniques and a dry ambient pressure design are a match made in heaven for my intended application. As to the question of size, I am working out several options each with it?s own set of compromises. In any case, the project will be a significant investment in time and money.
General Concept
If I want to keep in scale with the Disney - Goff boat and have some degree of comfort, it looks like with frames / stations spaced at around two feet, this would be something in the order of 36? L.O.A. (rough estimate). That is trying to keep her less than 10,000 lbs surface displacement if possible; again I have yet to do the calculations. The idea is a submarine cabin cruiser with some pretty serious panache, and if I can?t make it work, accidentally sink her, or get too old for diving (45 now I?ve got time I hope), the whole shebang can be converted to strictly surface use still with the underwater view ports. Really nice options here.
If I can?t keep her to scale and have to take a little ?creative license?, the one requirement is to have 6? standing headroom in the pilothouse for two; sitting for too long can be dangerous (peripheral circulation) and uncomfortable. In the main saloon area one may have to duck through in order to keep scale and the size reasonable. A convertible dinette to starboard and a galley to port, each centered under the round Plexiglas view ports and Victorian era décor right down to fake rivets on the interior. A porta-potty finds a home somewhere.
One problem that I see for me with this hull design is draft at D.W.L. is looking to be about 5 feet. If I run propulsion at an angle out of the bottom I could ballast her higher and lower in the water at will but I lose the efficiency of the straight shaft as well as the spirit of the design.
Another option is to go tiny, shrinking the cost and complexity as well but forget about any family members feeling comfortable about it and that?s no fun. This vessel as conceived, would be suitable for long distance surface travel throughout the Florida Keys and maybe even an occasional ?patrol? to Bimini to sink a fishing smack or two. :)
Machinery
At that weight she would require a little diesel in the order of 25 hp to move her at hull speed (maybe a little more with all that drag), I have no idea what the electric motor requirement would be at this point (group input here) and I envision some type of coupling system to the main shaft so both motors can take their turn. I don?t need too much underwater endurance (motor wise), just some degree of control as I envision putting the boat on the bottom (sandy patches), most dives.
The little motor might not turn a big enough alternator to charge the battery requirements (group input) so a small gen-set may or may not be required. Then there is the question of charging the air cylinders and you see a real engine room emerging. And in Florida, in a black / gray submarine with a grand total of two hatches topside, a 5000 btu marine air is a requirement on the surface. The design has to work the first time out, flood her and everything has to be torn down for rebuilding. Did I mention time and money?
Batteries (non-gassing)an lots of em, need to be as low in the hull as possible and may possibly be split into two banks fore and aft if not in the bilge centerline, depending on ballast tank arrangements.
Ballast and Air
I intend to follow the technology of the WWII fleet boats and await the NAVPERS manuals I ordered from www.history-on-cdrom.com which are quite detailed. The Nautilus hull appears to lend itself nicely to the same conceptual arrangement however, the problem of size (beam) arises here. I do not yet know the size requirements of the ballast system; its relationship to interior volume, and more research is needed in this area.
The same goes for the high-pressure air requirements and placement of those bottles may pose a problem for Nautilus depending on size and quantity. All controls run to a manifold in the pilothouse controlling both ballast and life support with one isolated secondary safety system having sufficient capacity to surface the boat. I do not yet know if a drop weight system is to be incorporated or not. The system may be sufficiently complex enough to require two crewmembers to control the boat when diving.
I noticed that the fleet type boats placed their bottles low in the hull and this may pose a problem for me configuration wise. There would be some space under the top deck (not much) but this would be too high for stability reasons. Perhaps in the ballast tanks themselves, this still needs to be worked out.
Some type of pressure relief valve(s) is required to vent cabin air overboard and keep Davy Jones at bay. I do not yet know where these are available, how many, flow capacity requirements (group input) or how they function (mechanical or pneumatic). Some manner of precise cabin airflow regulation is also required.
Hull Design
Here again more research is needed. I want to get away with as minimal possible hull material and still maintain a reasonable margin of safety and sea keeping ability. I see her going together on a strong back, plating over frames and bulkheads, standard stitch and tape epoxy construction, chine logs, butt blocks, etc. Lloyds certified marine ply throughout saturated with epoxy and exterior surfaces either glassed with GRP or another material I believe is called Dynel. Interior surfaces saturated with epoxy and painted to suit.
Someone mentioned to me "oil canning" of the hull and started me thinking about a lag in pressure compensation going both ways. The Gorgean brothers have done extensive research and stress analysis of marine plywood and cycling stresses so that work in conjunction with what I learn about ambient pressure hull design, will determine the specifics of materials and framing. I envision something like four bulkheads at this length among the frames with longitudinal requirements yet to be determined.
The exterior will be in keeping with the spirit of the design, right down to the 19,000 or so fake rivets on the hull. Did I mention time and money? In fact, I don?t need to bother hiding the glass tape on the panel joints either, take a good look at this surface. http://www.vulcaniasubmarine.com/The%20Eleven.htm A whole lot of wetted surface but I don?t care about going fast and the diesel will be efficient enough despite this.
Safety
In all my years of diving, I have never felt the desire to do saturation diving nor is that likely to change. I have plenty to see at less than 50 feet. The boat would never submerge unless those aboard are scuba certified, pony bottles would be secured to the bulkheads clearly marked and lit. She would never initiate a dive in greater than 25? and never venture where the bottom is greater than 50?.
And finally in the event there is a failure of the ballast tanks to blow or some other failure, a provision to flood the boat and exit one of two hatches would be made. Static stability would be designed to ensure that those hatches remain upright. The hatches themselves would be robust enough (Freeman) to ensure that any potential warping of the hull leaves them operational. As a last resort, the transporter could just ?beam? you ashore! (Just kidding?maybe:)
So there it is, my very own mad scientist project! I even have my own version of Vulcania as a building location.
Regards
Joe
From: Jim Pesanka <jpesanka@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Nemo's Nautilus
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:39:10 -0700 (PDT)
Hi Joe,I replied to you earlier, but it posted under the heading "another nutcase" so you might have missed it. Would you tell us how big of a Nautilus you are contemplating? Knowing that seems necessary to answering the questions you asked.Cheers!Jim
Joseph Perkel <joeperkel@hotmail.com> wrote:************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears in our database because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages from our organization. If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the link below or send a blank email message to: removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an automated process and should be complete within five minutes of our server receiving your request. PSUBS.ORG PO Box 311 Weare, NH 03281 603-529-1100 ************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ ************************************************************************
I would like to thank the group for the responses I have received which have been both encouraging and informative. I will be responding to individuals shortly however, as predicted, hurricane Wilma has knocked out our power and wreaked a bit of havoc here yet again, so I am writing this from work where priority services have been restored (a hospital).
Thank you
Joe
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.