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

RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Marian S201 Propulsion Data




Greetings SMMO's, ;)'
 
I received a very good and interesting response from Brett Phaneuf, who is the President of ProMare Inc..   I've included it below.
 
If you can acquire the batteries in low quantity at the same price they got, they are still very expensive at the cost of $2,777.00 each. Ouch!!!

Regards,
Brent Hartwig
 
 
 
Re: Marian S201 Submarine Li-ion Batteries‏
From: brett@promare.org
Sent: Mon 1/21/08 7:56 PM
To: Brent Hartwig (brenthartwig@hotmail.com)

Brent,

Please let Cliff know that R300 looks great and that we have been thinking of
building something similar for fun, but we've been tied up doing other work
with the Navy and haven't gotten around to it, but we'd love to learn more
about his sub.

That being said, we've had ups and downs with Valence batteries. The first run
had to be replaced due to manufacturing flaws, as did the second run. That's
180 batteries in all. The set we have now is the second generation of U-Charge
series and they seem to be working well. I should say that we did get good
performance out of the second run of the first-gen but they had some
capacitance issues that can be traced, possibly, to impurities in the cells
during assembly.

Anyway, we've been very happy with the batteries and would recommend them with
several caveats, those being that they are much more demanding in terms of
charging and maintenance. Of course we have 90 on board with 150kWhrs of power
and I'm assuming the R300 is only going to run 4 or so at a nominal 48VDC?
Anyway, shouldn't be a problem to charge them, but you'll need a battery CPU to
monitor them during charging and also discharge. I suppose if you were only
using 4 you could just have the computer set up when you are charging and then
just not worry about it when in operation, but then you would have no way to
know if there was a problem developing or not in terms of heat or capacitance.
That being said, it's really during charging, and not discharge (assuming you
aren't pulling a crazy load) that you ned to be very, very careful.

We are looking at using the Epoch series but the next couple of subs in
construction require greater power density than Valence can provide and we are
working with another company to make use of a liquid polymer system that is
considerably more expensive and more dangerous and something that CANNOT be! in
t he inhabited space.

So, if you need more information we'd be happy to tell you what we can, but
can't really comment on the use of S201 as it is primarily for research with
the Navy.

In short, I'd recommend the batteries from Valence but you need to go into it
with your eyes open and remember that in many cases you will be learning on the
job.
One more thing, cost.....I believe that for us the cost was somewhere around 
$250,000 for the batteries. Again, we needed 90...no idea what 4 would costyou..

Hope this note finds you well and happily building submarines.

Brett


Quoting Brent Hartwig <brenthartwig@hotmail.com>:

>
> Dear Mr. Phaneuf
> I'm apart of a international group of people that design and/or build there
> own private, usually small submarines. http://www.psubs.org/ We are
> interesting in the Marian S201, and in particular it's Li-ion batteries. We
> have been looking at the Valence, U-Charge Li-ion batteries and soon to be
> available Epoch Li-ion large batteries from Valence as well, to increase are
> subs battery endurance. One of the most interesting subs to be recently
> completed by one of the guys in are group is the R300. The designer and
> builder is Cliff Redus, and he is one of the guys that would like to change
> out his lead acid batteries for large Li-ion batteries.
> http://www.psubs.org/projects/redus/If it's not a big trade secret, we would
> like to know what brand and model of batteries you used in the Marian S201.
> Also if possible knowing the price of the batteries and supplier would be
> very helpful in deciding if they are a financial option for certain projects.
> Regards,
> Brent Hartwig 'Amateurs built the Ark, Professionals built the
> Titanic.' ~Unknown
&g! t;
&g t;



Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:20:04 -0800
From: cliffordredus@sbcglobal.net
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Marian S201 Propulsion Data
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org

Brent
 
Along with the great submerged endurance which I find believable based on a very hydrodynamically clean boat shape, an efficient drive train and the lithium ion batteries, there are a lot of nice features to the Marlin 201 worth considering for anyone designing a 1-atm boat. Including:
  1.  very good hydrodynamics, (best I have every seen for non military sub)
  2. external stiffeners on pressure hull maximizes space inside pressure hull
  3. low sail profile to minimize pitching moment due to sail drag
  4. removable heads on the pressure hull to promote equipment installation and service
  5. removable FRP shell sections for maintenance and access
  6. external air and O2 storage
  7. nice flexible design for thru-hull penetrations
  8. sound isolation that occurs by placing canned drive motor/propulsion shaft outside the pressure hull
  9. Completely enclosed  FRP MBT's rather than FRP parts sealed against the pressure hull. Eliminates leaks and corrosion issues.
  10. flexibility to have a future large main viewport by simply switching out bow head
  11. flexibility of either a forward MBT or straddle style forward MBT
  12. direct coupled AC motor to prop drive shaft with advanced/efficient VSD
  13. high power to weight next generation lithium ion battery bank (expensive)
  14. Sail mounted forward control surface to minimize sonar inference and  facilitate flexible main viewport options
  15. Meets ABS   minimum free board constraint by offsetting cylindrical pressure hull in cylindrical hydrodynamic shell and the use of FRP sail cowling around hatch
  16. Initial phase low cost viewport arrangement
  17. Hatch design that solves welding warpage issue
  18. acrylic low drag cowling over forward viewport
  19. very fast 17 month design through commissioning schedule for a new ABS A1 classed vessel.
It's  obvious that a lot of lessons learned from previous builds were incorporated into the S201.  One thing that strikes me as odd about the S201  is the fact it does not have a diesel engine. You would think that with a 10 ton displacement and 30 ft in length, they would gone for the diesel-electric hybrid arrangement.  This must have been a client constraint.
 
Cliff