Matrix Printing Technology in Seasteading
March 16, 2014 at 9:56 am #23130
Ellmer said: “Kat, never said you should matrix print underwater – to understand how a part that ends up 70m underwater is built in floating status on the surface”, but he had also suggested a seastead can grow after it’s occupied. Unless the cement is being printed or slipformed or cast on the seastead’s surface above the waterline, it just isn’t happening. So how will the seastead grow, “never said you should matrix print underwater”, if you cannot make the hull longer or wider? I am concerned about how much air you can trap under the deck to make it float, but you just said you cannot print in the water, and you cannot attach a new cement floatie to an existing hull.. so how will printer tech solve making the hull grow wider or longer?March 16, 2014 at 11:22 am #23131
Kat, why do you suppose that just because the site is floating it can not increase LOA and beam ? who said that? If you print a dot on the stern LOA increases with every dot, if you print the sides beam increases with every dot. You do not “trap air under the deck” … the buoyancy comes from displacement. As the build grows and sinks deeper new parts of the hull will go under the waterline – of course you print those parts of the hull BEFORE they go under the waterline not after. Check the Rion-Antirion video (minute 14:44 into the film) to understand that process properly.
http://concretesubmarine.activeboard.com/t45825534/the-making-of-the-rion-antirion-bridge-pylon-video/March 16, 2014 at 1:22 pm #23132
Ellmer said ” If you print a dot on the stern LOA increases with every dot, if you print the sides beam increases with every dot”. Sure it does, so why don’t we take one 5 gallon bucket, put it afloat on the ocean, and start printing a 300ft x 300ft deck on it? Because it will sink, that’s why. Why will it sink? Because as you said “the buoyancy comes from displacement”, to make it float, you must displace (displace = push out of the way) the water with something, and most boats are full of AIR. Go to any main deck of any boat, pump in water so there is no more air below the main deck, and see if you don’t sink. Go to any pontoon boat and let the air out of the pontoons so water flows in, and see if you don’t sink. Take that 5 gallon bucket, put it in the water upside down, so it traps air, displacing the water, and then flip it over so the air rushes to the surface and see if it doesn’t sink.
I don’t want to build a vertical submarine, or a Rion-Antirion set of tower legs. If i make a floating deck with displaced water under it (displaced by AIR), and i want to make the deck stay floating but be twice as big, i MUST increase the displacement, or it will sink. You say i can grow a seastead by continuously printing onto it. If the seastead is one piece and is already in the water, and i need to increase the displacement, i do not want it to sink deeper, and you say “If you print a dot on the stern LOA increases with every dot, if you print the sides beam increases with every dot”, so show me how i will increase bouyancy without printing only on top of the deck (don’t want it to sink), which means i must be able to “print a dot on the stern” or bow, or sides, underwater, to add to the hull, to increase the displacement, which is done by using a hull (which is a fancy streamlined 5 gallon bucket) to make a hole in the water to contain AIR under the deck where the water was.
If you do not think “trapped air” will float a deck, toss a sheet of plywood into the water, inflate party balloons with air, and fasten up under the plywood. Or place upside down buckets full of air under the plywood, the buckets trap the air, same as the balloons trap the air, the air displaces the water, if you drill holes in the buckets to let the air out, the deck will sink.March 16, 2014 at 3:21 pm #23133
Kat you need to get your Archimedes right
The only requirement is that the shape of the hull desplaces enough water as it sinks deeper to sustain the weight of the dots that you add above the surface. Sounds like you did not check and understand the pylon video…
Check the Rion-Antirion video (minute 14:44 into the film) to understand that process properly. The shape can be vertical or horizontal that does not matter as long as you keep it in balance with Archimedes during the build.
You can build a ship shape or a sphere just the same way. The key is to understand the law of buoyancy properly and use it in your favor. Buoyancy has noting to do with “Air” only with weight and displacement. As long as the build weights less than the water it displaces it floats – the shape does not matter, the air does not matter, where on the build you add weight above or below the surface does not matter – the build will automaticly seek its balance with Archimedes by sinking deeper (and displace more water) as weight is added. Just compensate the sinking deeper by doting the freeboard around the structure up and all is fine, and while you dot the freeboard up you can add or reduce lenght and beam as you wish. Probably the best way to understand that is building a concrete canoe and print up the freeboard by hand – (don’t need a printer to put dots on the canoe) .March 16, 2014 at 3:54 pm #23134
Ellmer, i understand bouyancy perfectly, i am only look at it slightly differently to suit my design goals, and i am contesting your statement that you can keep on printing a seastead forever to make it bigger.
Are you saying that the plywood-balloon trial i suggested will fail, and the platform will not float? Are you saying if you put 5 gallon buckets full of air, upside down so they are open to the water, under the plywood deck that it will not float?
Are you saying you CANNOT keep printing onto the seastead to make it grow, because it will get deeper and deeper vs wider and wider? In the example i gave, i don’t want a seastead that sinks deeper every time i add more freeboard, i want the same draft and freeboard but more surface area. I know this can be done with steel, there’s any number of ways to add floatation below the waterline to keep the draft the same. It can be done with plastic buckets and cement containers that float too. But you cannot do it with a printer, and so far you cannot show how to attach cement floatation chambers to anything. And i don’t see how you can build, or much increase the deck space, of any seastead at sea in the waves by pouring/printing more cement onto it. Those towers you keep throwing at me are not wide and long, they are deep. And if you took all the money from all the TSI forum subscribers, i bet you cannot make one Rion tower.
But lets say you print a set of towers like those, so you can then float them up like pontoons. Ok, you printed pontoons. Now show me how you will increase the length of your pontoon boat next year without sinking the whole bloody ship so you can get the stern out of the water again.March 16, 2014 at 4:09 pm #23135
Kat, just go ahead and do your plywood-ballon thing – and tell me how it went… let’s talk that in three years after you did it OK? In case you are not satified with your process and the outcome it produces, come back to this thread, read it again, hear carefully what i say, try to understand it, and maybe you will get a few ideas …March 16, 2014 at 4:25 pm #23137
Ellmer, look for a book published in 1971 by the usa military, entitled “MOBILE OCEAN BASING SYSTEMS – A CONCRETE CONCEPT”, written by J. J. Hromadik, 142 pages. It was sponsored in part by Woods Hole Oceanographic, and was originally limited to usa gov viewing only. Figure 1.1 in that book shows a cut-away view of a large ocean-going platform which was envisioned to be in the 300x300ft to 3000×3000 feet (900m x 900m, 208 acres) in size, possibly strong enough to land the largest of aircraft on. There were a number of variations on that design, all working by trapping air in very large diameter open pipes under the platform. Some generated electricity from the wave action on the open ends of the pipes.
Naturally, these designs would barely move at all in any direction you wanted them to move, the water drag was enormous, no matter how much horsepower you threw at them, so the military didn’t want them. No one else could afford them. Or saw a need for them. But they were made of precast, or cast-able on site, open-bottom concrete or cement floatation devices that trapped air under a deck, so Archimedes be damned, i’m not stupid as you are thinking i am.
I have a pdf scan of the book.March 16, 2014 at 4:26 pm #23138
Eller wrote :”Kat, just go ahead and do your plywood-ballon thing” ,, and it is so sad you think a balloon full of air will not float on top of the water.March 16, 2014 at 4:44 pm #23140
Kat never said that anything you planted would not float, we discussed Richi Sowa and his bottle island years ago and i suggested a “buoyancy injector as a possible way to seasteading” (January 7, 2010) then myself – in the meantime i have built stuff, tested, stuff, optimized things, and my current opinion is that there are more efficient ways – but that is just my opinion – so if you build it and get good results – i have no problem with that- at all.
http://www.seasteading.org/forum-list/topic/buoyancy-injector-geo-tissue-and-vegetation-matrix-islands-gradual-building/March 16, 2014 at 5:14 pm #23141
I was half joking and half serious, basically trying to say that while theoretically we might be able to 3D print the hull of a seastead, the rest of the on board systems will have to be added on in a conventional marine engineering way.
BUT, even if we will be able to duplicate the required strengths of a seastead hull by 3D printing it, it seems to me that we can only “print” up and away from the hull we started on,…if you can understand my logic….Therefore, the seastead will “grow” in length and beam, “diagonally up and away” sort of speaking, and it will become heavier and increase its draft.
Plus, will it be cost effective compared to traditional construction techniques? Building THAT 3D printer,…can it 3D print in cement over rebar?,…Shipping the cement to be printed with on the seastead will be costly,…since the bigger the seastead now the more increase in draft, we will have to move further away from shore in deeper water (to accommodate for draft). The further away from shore, the costly EVERYTHING will be in regards to 3D printing.
Or, am I just misunderstanding the whole process here?March 16, 2014 at 5:59 pm #23143
Ocean, i have not seen a matrix printer working cost effective compared to traditional construction techniques so far.I also have no inmediate plans to build one either. What i would rescue from matrix printing at this moment is the general idea to build up a seastead in layers which goes great with floating building sites. In the experiments i did so far the “matrix printer” was a man with a bucket of fiberconcrete and a spoon to place the material. Work costs very little here in South America so the need to put a machine where i can put a man is not very urgent. My current favorite is a mix of established technologies that has turned out to be most efficient in floating building. I now asign 8 squaremeter of hull per day as production target to a worker and i have run pilot projects between 166 USD and 480 USD per “squaremeter floating real estate” in pilot projects. Non of those pilot projects included a matrix printer yet. So i just have no “efficiency compare data” worker/printer available. The future will show how quick the technology evolves. To build a floating project today i would not waste a lot of thoughts on printers but i would certainly include dot technology for complicated curved shapes and concrete sculpture. Again this is not a VERSUS thing – it is about taking advantage of all technology and logistics possible to set up a project that cranks out floating real estate as economic and efficient as possible. If you check the container wharf below you will find that the walls of the honeycomb structure are built in cast technology as any local concrete contractor can handle it and the tops are made of precast concrete plating that is connected with cast joints. Simple and efficient.
Same thing at Nkossa…
There is no need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to industrial scale. – not yet…
A early intent to build a keel structure in dot method …
A plate in fiberconcrete “guidance layer method” – not doted – one of my favorites…
Modular platform raft up testing…
Submarine cast method…1993
You see i have tested around a bit…March 16, 2014 at 6:26 pm #23145
I totally agree.
Now, for further references, is the $480/sq meter a rebar reinforced hull, or what else and how thick? Also Do you have any idea how much a shipping container would cost from Cartagena to Port of Miami? Your price is a mega bargain compared to what they charge around here,…But shipping might be a problem.March 16, 2014 at 6:49 pm #23146
Ocean, if you are offering money, i’ll offer to make in modules in the usa. Just tell me how you will connect them up so they don’t break where they are attached when pushed around by waves. I have the steel outer form laid out right in front of the house now, and working out how to make the inner form collapseable once the cement is set.March 16, 2014 at 6:56 pm #23147
I am not offering money, yet I am keeping my options open, for now. Where do you live in US?March 16, 2014 at 7:05 pm #23148
Ocean the figure is money pumped into project divided by real estate squaremeter output of the project. It is a project cost figure, not a squaremeter sales figure (except if you want to sell at cost).
For the submarine shells a squaremeter real estate (floor space) calculates as 2,5 cubic meter volume (room height 2,5m). For the platforms a squaremeter real estate is “deckspace”. The big submarine shell is 200 tons (equivalent of a 68 squaremeter apartment). Its wall thickness is 36cm (at the tickest part) 20cm at the tinnest.
All examples above are reinforced shells.
Basicly those items represent our two investigation branches, surface floating honeycomb shells, represented by the ramform, and the plate seastead, and submerged shells represented by the bubble concept and the captain nemo float out.
Read more about the ramform:
Read more about the plate seastead:
Read more about the bubble concept:
Read more about the captain nemo float out:
Freight rate Cartagena Miami is: 40 High Cube $3,600
The forum ‘Engineering’ is closed to new topics and replies.
Posted on at