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

Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: Variable Ballast Calculations, Bill



Hi Dan.
 
I agree, you would have to have a manual or electrical pump to force the water out, but I think that
 
wouldn't take up as much room as air tanks. However; I believe the hatches and viewports
 
would not absolutely HAVE to be built to withstand pressure from both sides, because you will either be equalized
 
or always have more pressure from outside than inside assuming of course that you worked
 
your pump and valves correctly when accending. I do see the possibility if say you
 
were at 99 ft (4atm), and the sub's interior was pressurized at 2atm (33ft), and then you accended using
 
only your dive planes WITHOUT remembering to pump the water out and thereby decrease the interior
 
pressure,  that would cause a situation where once you went ABOVE 2 atm (33ft) you would have
 
MORE pressure inside than outside and as you mentioned, and that would cause overpressure in the
 
boat that could blow a viewport and cause a violent opening of the hatch if you tried to pop it on the surface,
 
or even jam the hatch release because there was too much inside pressure against the hatch latch. Another thing
 
that could happen if you forgot to pump down before accending is you could get a leak thru your hatch from the pressure
 
forcing outward instead of inward which helps to seal most hatches. You would always have to remember
 
to pump your air down before accending. But I think the benefits might be worth it since your
 
body could take the pressure longer and deeper in your hybrid sub than it could in a normal ambient sub.
 
You just COULDN'T forget to pump the air down. One should have a pressure gauge inside the sub and
 
monitor it. The only other alternative would be as you said to make the viewports and hatch withstand pressure from
 
both sides, but you would still have the hatch being too pressurized from the inside if you forgot to pump
 
down even if your viewports and hatch were reinforced on both sides for pressure. You would definately have to be sharp
 
and pay attention to what you were doing on accending.
 
Your points are well taken and valid. I appreciate you pointing them out.
 
I might mention that Horace Hunley was killed on one of the Hunley's training missions because he forgot to close the
 
water intake valves. This happened because the Hunley could only fill her tanks about half full at the surface because once she did
 
that, her interior became ambient and equalized and would not let any more water into the ballast tanks. Her hatches would
 
still be above the surface with her tanks filled as much as they COULD BE at the surface. When the Hunley filled her ballast tanks at
 
the surface as much as they COULD, there was only a difference of 12 inches between her waterline then, verses her waterline
 
before they started filling the tanks at the surface. Then Horace had to force the Hunley
 
under using her forward motion and dive planes so the superior water pressure would fill the tanks the rest of the way.
 
The problem was, obviously Horace opened the inlet valves on the surface so the Hunley could take on as much water as
 
she could before she became ambiently equalized and no more water would enter the ballast tanks, then Horace forced the Hunley
 
under using forward motion and dive planes. As the Hunley decended the superior water pressure caused the ballast tanks to start
 
filling again and Horace forgot to turn the valves off, overfilling the tanks and sinking her.  He got distracted possibly and didn't stay sharp.
 
I can see that happening because they had to first fill the tanks as much as they could at the surface, then the crew would crank the
 
prop shaft and start out building forward motion to force her under using the dive planes. There may have been a few minutes between
 
when Horace opened the tank valves on the surface and when they actually began to submerge. 
 
A deadly mistake with those open top/open to the hull interior ballast tanks and no safety backup.
 
A new hybrid should be built to preclude that mistake ever happening again. One way would be to not have the tank tops open to the
 
hull and just use a valve instead. Possibly a valve that would automatically shut off when sensing a certain air pressure in the boat.
 
You might also install a valve on the the sub that would sense the difference in air pressure within the boat and without, that would
 
automatically open to release air from the hull if you accended using only your dive planes so the hull would never over pressurize more
 
than the outside water pressure.
 
That would certainly make a good safety backup if you forgot to pump the interior air pressure down.
 
I don't view this type of hybrid sub operation as any more dangerous than reviewing a checklist on an aircraft before taking off and landing.
 
If the pilot doesn't put the flaps and gear down for landing it could be disasterous, same with the sub.
 
Bill.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan H.
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: Variable Ballast Calculations, Bill

Bill,
 
Don't forget that the air tanks you don't need to have in the sub are replaced with an air pump and a power source to operate it, or you have to use muscle power. 
 
Also, hatches and viewports have to be built to withstand pressure from both sides.  Not a big problem with smaller viewports, but a hatch has a big area and the latch has to hold it sealed.  If you get to the surface before pumping down your internal air, you have 6000 pounds trying to blow a 24 inch hatch opened. 
 
Dan H.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Akins
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 2:26 AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: Variable Ballast Calculations, Bill

Hi Paul.
 
I'd be glad to explain the values for you of compressing the subs interior atmosphere via the ballast tanks filling.
 
If your (AT THE MOMENT, because it becomes 1 atm again later)  ambient tanks were filling without any air loss, that would compress
 
the interior atmosphere of your hull if your tanks were connected to the hull's interior.
 
The value of that would be that you did not lose any air and could pump the water back out of the
 
tanks using inside the hull pumps and then your atmosphere would expand again and be 14.7 psi and that means you could surface
 
without having to have air tanks. Which is exactly how the Hunley ballast tanks worked.
 
So one value would be you wouldn't need air tanks to surface with a savings on interior space. NO air tanks needed ever to blow.
 
Another value would be that, lets say you were at 2 atmospheres, or 33 feet, (remember we have 1 atm on us at the surface already)
 
and you allowed the incoming pressure of the ballast tanks filling to compress your internal atmosphere so the interior and exterior were
 
equalized at that depth, now lets say you closed off the water inlet valve at 33 ft, which would mean you wouldn't pressurize any more when you went deeper,
 
then that means you could decend another atmosphere (3 atm now) to 66 feet (by forcing the sub under with the planes) and only have ONE atmosphere of FELT external pressure
 
exerted against the outside of the sub even though you were at 3 atm. Because you already had the interior pressurized to 2 atm before
 
you shut off the valve. That means you could design a hybrid ambient/1atm sub with a hull that could go deeper than a typical ambient
 
could safely go because your body has to follow the "no decompression scuba dive table limits" and in a typical ambient at 66 ft your
 
body is under the pressure of 3 atm, whereas in the way I explained the hybrid above, your body would only be under the pressure of
 
2 atm even though your sub was at 3 atm. If you compressed your interior atmosphere ambiently to 33 ft so now your body would be under
 
2 atm, then you close off the valve, but you dive your sub to 99 ft or 4 atm and the outside water pressure on the sub is only 2 FELT atm because
 
the interior is pushing back with 2 atm of its own against outside water pressure. Not needing air tanks and your body able to be submerged
 
deeper and longer than in a normal ambient sub would be the main valuable benefits and a third side benefit would also be that your hull would
 
not have to be anywhere near as strong as a 1 atm hull because you are for a large part using it as an ambient hull which requires little strength and
 
thickness and you could submerge to deeper atmospheres with less FELT water pressure pressing against the hull because you already had
 
several atmospheres inside the sub pushing outward . Do these sound like valuable assets? I think they have possibilities for no decompression
 
ambient sub operation at scuba dive table limit depths. 
 
 
Recap.....no air tanks needed for ballast tanks, body can dive deeper and longer than normal ambient sub
 
and hull doesn't need to be as strong as 1 atm WHEN USED AT PROPER DEPTHS FOR YOUR DESIGN.
 
Did that help you Paul? 
 
Bill.
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: Variable Ballast Calculations, Bill

Could someone please explain the value of connecting the ballast tank air volumes with the sub interior? 

thanks-
Paul

On 11/13/05, Joseph Perkel <joeperkel@hotmail.com> wrote:

Bill,

"Now imagine.....you ENCLOSED those tanks so their bottoms were enclosed and then you put a water inlet on/off valve at the top of both tanks on the INSIDE of the sub. Now you'd have a Kittridge sub that had ambient tanks that as they filled they compressed the interior atmosphere of your sub" 

This is an interesting idea worth investigating. I wonder though, about a disparity in volumes between the tanks and interior as well as rate of air flow and how everything ties together.

Thanks

Joe