BERGSTEAD KIWI – 1:35 scale
September 9, 2011 at 3:36 am #1625
It is about that time again. A lot was learned from building the first model, and i have made many changes to the design already. I have also bought more materials from Depot to to build another form.
Stay posted for all the action!
*Update – fast forward to page 6 for the actual construction. It took awhile to initialize the project.Stats:20m X 20m2550 sq ft interior living space – NOT including the garage or mechanical room.4,010 sq ft patio areaGarage holds practically any 40 ft offshore powerboat, AND 4 jet ski’s.Ballast area holds something like 2800 cu m of h2o.Pendulum is made of 500 cu m of concrete. Prob cheap shitty ass concrete.All greenery on top deck is plastic.September 9, 2011 at 3:51 am #15375
Man that looks great your last one came out great so cant wait to see all the pics and infoSeptember 9, 2011 at 4:25 am #15383
hey awesome, once you have it made, can raft them together, modular-island style.
calm aware desire choice love express intuit moveSeptember 9, 2011 at 5:24 pm #15400
Water density is 1000 kg/ sq.m = 1 ton/sq.m. You gonna ballast the structures with 2800 tons of water,….per your specs. That’s A LOT of ballast! More then half of your structure displacement will be “wasted” as ballast tank(s). That’s a lot of wasted space man. Your are looking at a total of 2800 sq.m (3 decks basically = 20mx20mx7m = 60′x60′x21′) that you builded to be flooded instead of using it for living space, storage, etc.
Also, in order to handle pumping 2800 tons of water in and out of your bilge you need heavy duty pumps, a huge battery bank and a big generator to recharge the batteries, and big fuel tanks. All this equipment will take a bite of your living space big time. If you also add space needed for provisions storage, spare parts, tools, holding tank, etc, you should be happy if you are left with 1800 sq.ft of total, actual living space + under the sun.
Since you are going to spend 95% of your time @ the surface, to me, having more than 50% of you space onboard allocated for 5% use in terms of time is a very poor space management planning. Not only that, but your operational expenses will skyrocket since you are cutting off into your self-sufficiency big time. If the 2800 sq.m are to be used for provision and fuel storage instead of ballast you can maybe be self sufficient for around 1 year. The way you set it up for now you are looking at maybe 2 month. It translates in 6 more trips to shore, back and forth to supply per year. That will burn you extra cash, depending how far from shore you are moored.September 10, 2011 at 12:35 am #15408
Ocean ur killin me. “that huge ballast area is only good 5% of the time”. thats as funny as it gets man. okay, u build a different design thats not safe in a bad storm. i welcome u to put it next to mine because once that 5% situation occurs I have a funny feeling theres gonna be a knock on my hatch. remember, going by the rules of the game, if ur seastead has to be taken to shore at random unexpected times, it is not a seastead.
“Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”September 10, 2011 at 5:11 am #15415
How about this.
Lets start trying to think of ways to actively use the balast area during non-submerged times so that it is “less wasteful” as it were. I completely agree with the idea that for a seastead to be successful it must fully utilize space to its upmost ability, so lets think of other ways to utilize the balast area as well.
I’ll post my ideas when I’m less completely trashed. (Im on leave, I’m allowed to be shit-faced)September 10, 2011 at 7:21 pm #15435
You provided the specs and I did comment, according to my experience. You do have a 60′ x 60′ x 21′ (20m x 20m x 7m) ballast cubic space. That is HUGE and IT IS more than 50% of your displacement according to your specs. To me, after 25 years of sailing around and having owned 15 boats IT IS A WASTE of space. That oppinion is not going to change and any sailor or naval architect is going to tell you the same thing.
Hey, you can take them to the water but you cannot make them drink.
Nobody’s going to knock on your hatch, lol. Trust me. In the storm that you will be riding, the seastead I designed will not be in a storm, but 500 nm away in shelter waters because it’s mobile. And trust me when I say to you that from a category 1 huricane and up, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saffir%E2%80%93Simpson_Hurricane_Scale, the bergstead will be toasted, no matter how many anchors you have down there, no matter how solid off a mooring you think you have, no matter if submerged or floating. It is a fact of life. Storms are to be avoided at all cost, in my book.
As I said before, you do as you wish. You don’t have to belive me if you don’t feel like,…September 10, 2011 at 9:50 pm #15436
Ocean, i would consider that shreds bergstead can survive even a hurricane . The structure looks solid enough to take the impact of a wave crest.
Most modern ships have incedible thin the steelplating and are built close to the structural limits to safe costs –
Shredders berg looks like a structure that has a good amount of structural reserve and i would not expect major damage from a wave going over the top of the structure. This is more than most of the structures that are currently out at sea can offer.
concretesubmarine.comSeptember 10, 2011 at 10:39 pm #15437
is he pulling my leg or did i just get actual encouragement from Navtec, Inc?
Ocean i cant wait to bullshit w you over a beer. too bad Emmett and Ellmer wont be able to join us. i have very little engineering qualification, and less experience as a boat pilot. Everything i say is gonna sound like complete gibberish, lol! remind me to tell u about the time we had a little boat near the Chesapeake and got completely lost back when i was a teenager.
Emmett – inside of a ballast tank? dude ur really drunk man, i can tell. if this idea works out – full credit to u. where do we start?
side note. since im leaving for Fla on tues i decided not to do much with this model till i get back on the 20th.
“Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”September 10, 2011 at 10:41 pm #15438
I agree. I also cannot find anything suggesting that storms significantly change subsurface currents in such a drastic manner as to dislodge the moorings of the bergstead once it submerges to avoid an oncoming storm. Even the largest hurricanes, from what I’ve been reading, have little effect on even local currents, and certainly not enough of an effect to rupture a solid mooring.
Now, I may just not be reading the right things – I have literally zero knowledge on this topic other than what Ive read in the last few days – so if Im wrong, please direct me towards reading that will show otherwise.September 10, 2011 at 10:51 pm #15439
well there is one problem i had with the first model that keeps me from being able to test it for strength underwater. otherwise i would be testing out the limitations in scale size. i havent found a way yet to make the lid sealable for a reasonable price.
once i get that situated i can try stuff.
“Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”September 11, 2011 at 3:03 am #15443
“Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”September 11, 2011 at 3:42 am #15447
To seal the lid: a tube of silicone. You will have to put on a new seal every time you want to test it, but a tube should be good for 2 or 3 tests, and they are only a couple bucks.September 11, 2011 at 5:19 am #15452
in a category 4 or 5 hurricane, waves can reach up to 100′ height and the ocean response propagates down to hundred of feet. http://www.gomr.boemre.gov/homepg/regulate/environ/ongoing_studies/gm/GM-06-x10.htmlSeptember 11, 2011 at 5:32 pm #15458
big problem. talking about the seafoor, im having trouble with my pendulum and keeping it off the seafloor. you might think that no seastead could accidently graze the bottom because it has too much height, right? wrong. my idea was to make it a bed and breakfast off the coast of Ocean City MD, 12-15 miles offshore. well the height of the berg, currently, is 21m from the patio level to the tip of the pyramid weight. then you would also want at least a few meters below the surface, right? so lets say we need 25m or 80 ft depth. then you need to monitor the dive depth so you need to have a range of, say, 5m up or down? you need to be in water that’s at least 100ft deep to operate a bergstead properly during a major storm. according to Google Earth, if u put your cursor over the water it gives you “altitude” of -70 feet in that area. i never saw that one coming.
you dont get 100ft depth until about 20 miles out. if thats the case, shuttling these bed and breakfast patrons to and from the shore is gettin really expensive and time consuming. even if u cater to the high dollar crowd and transport them at 100mph, your still looking at 25mins in each direction. ugh!
“Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Posted on at