|
Hi Sean and obviously to all fellow members, Les
here in Australia monitoring all the blurb, it is
all interesting and informative.
Just a couple of thoughts, as with Doctors talking
with their trained terminology, likewise, Engineers and the like, to those not
in the field it does sound complicated,
inherently increased by those same professionals
not having that other specialized field of knowing how to impart that
knowledge.
It is all in the way it is presented .....as a
suggestion; would it not be simpler to give an example of a simple
workable format and then the related maths to confirm how it was established so
that individuals can reverse engineer a simple format to assist them to
understand the principles, maths and calculations easier, to apply to for more
complicated formats.
i.e..
A simple example if you like, to help them
visualize and get an indication of exactly what is involved.
eg. If someone in the club, engineering orientated, could, for the
exercise, apply this to;
a simple cylinder say 1200mm diameter x 4meter long, no tapers
include two normal round end caps no other orifices
for maximum depth operating 300feet add the
safety margin say 25% or whatever the recommendation is
then calculate the requirements using solid sheet
steel and say what thickness is required to withstand the appropriate
pressure.
then calculate what steel thickness is required with stiffeners at a set
spans and give those dimensions of material for the same pressure.
Perhaps even the same cylinder confiuration at 200 feet and 100feet and 50
feet to give people a feel of the material sizes and weight changes
for
each depth pressure.
What
this does for the layperson is give them a perception of size, shape, steel
dimensions, weight etc.of what they should be considering ,which also acts
as a
reasonable check to their later calculations with tapers and other shapes,
and conning towers, considering dynamic loads etc.
They
then have an idea of what expectations should be for the environment
they are calculating for .........a base line if you
like.
The
disciplines that are required to build a successful submarine are many and there
are very few who have mastered them all, but so many logical practical
people
can more quickly gain an learn if they are given a base line in all
areas
For example until you are give a weight indication of an
unknown item you are completely in the dark unless it is your
field.
For
example, the size and weight of an appropriate re-breather unit for a
given number of persons and hours of use etc.
How much volume a 1000litres of liquid takes up, the weight of a 1000
litres of liquid etc. the size and weight of appropriate batteries
etc.
This
is the same for all of us outside our normal expertise ...a fact often forgotten
by those within it.
The list is endless.....but once you have an indication (an
example) of requirements the mind can perceive and calculate and work out
accordingly,
at least a rough indication anyway.
It is a simple thing really..........how many of us can even visualize
what 10 million $1 notes look like, let alone how
much
volume, or how much weight is involved. ...yes we can, given the weight of
one note and the size of one note, whether new or old notes, and how
tightly they can be bound etc we can work it
out eventually, but until then we have absolutely no idea.
However a given indication, is enough to
be informative enough to roughly gauge
these specifications of any amount.
Well I have waffled on enough, I hope this simple
suggestion is a positive one and seen as useful to aid new members,
even some old ones .........on the lighter side, if anyone was comfortable in
visualising that 10million $1 question without assistance .. ... we all
want to be your friend and sit with you in your room and count it with you.
Cheers
Les from down under.
----- Original Message -----
|