Spar platform design and constructio- some ideas and some criticisms.

Syndicate replies to “Spar platform design and constructio- some ideas and some criticisms.” topic

 

Most of us seem to be envisioning some sort of broader structure to fit atop the spar design. It's probably going to be impossible to build a platform and then just hoist it in one piece to the top of the spar. So first, some criticisms:

  • It's got to be assembled after the spar is vertical, which means at sea.
  • This means another platform from which to work while this is happening, probably a tender ship of some kind, perhaps the one that towed to spar into position in the first place.
  • The interior of the spar won't be completed either, until it's vertical.
  • Just too many things that can't be nailed firmly into place while hanging in mid-air.
  • I can see it quite likely taking months to finish the Spar simply to sustainably live-able standards after towing it out to sea. So much of this comes from the need to re-orient the structure once in place, and that's due to the deep draft.

Some of the design requirements will depend on the size of the spar,  what you plan to use it for etc. But here are some ideas based on some requirements I have gleaned from discussion:

  • Either the top of the spar or the platform needs to incorporate a safety hull
  • The platform should be designed with occasional extremely windy conditions in mind
  • Square gives more surface area, but round(ish) probably balances better, it's better in high winds, and may be easier to construct: leading in to the next point.
  • A conical safety hull attached to the spar and leading out to the edge of the round platform gives a continuous buttress to the outer edge of the platform, as well as providing useful enclosed cubic for living/working/equipment. In fact, properly designed trusses could extend quite a way beyond this buttress.
  • This conical safety hull could be integral, or bolted on. Either way, it requires to ability to withstand a fairly harsh drop to the water's surface. It doesn't have to be a continuous hull, it could be seperate sections.
  • The bottom of this cone could probably be down to nearly the average wave height. We wouldn't worry as much about rogue waves and high seas, because they're rare enough and the increased surface area presented to the wave is gradually increasing in inverse ratio to the probable height/force of the wave.
  • It eliminates or minimizes the need for suspension cables cluttering up the overhead, which will be busy enough with radar/radio masts, windmills, flight deck, etc. 
  • Trusses for decking from the outside edge of such a conical safety hull to the spar hull are fairly simple to design. Leaving the center of the Spar open for elevator shafts etc.
  • The enclosed (lower) decks (of the platform) could be pre-fab/modular wall sections like the Deltec Homes design (tho almost certainly made of metal).
  • However, the trusses that they use for flooring would probably be wall-height for at least some of the pie-sections.
  • The more pre-fab and modular things are, the more of the work can be done on land. This is most of all SAFER, but also cheaper, and faster.
  • The top deck would have discrete structures on it, geodesic domes built from modular panels where purposes of the structure don't actually negate the possibility of domes, as well as windmills, equipment masts, cranes, hoists, flight deck etc.

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Your first point, about the

Your first point, about the structure needing to be assembled in place, is not nessecarily true.

The idea is to have the living space to be able to float independently, then lower the spar, manouver it below the living space, attach it, and raise it again, with the help of variable ballast.

This would be very helpfull indeed, as it would reduce logistical problems and associated construction costs dramaticly.

Good point

I had missed that idea, somewhere in the maze of the forum. That does eliminate some issues of construction. It also perhaps allows the platform to be more or less fully inhabitable before the spar is launched, and give a work platform from which to finish the interior of the spar.

  • I think the modularity ideas still stand.
  • In the case of a ferrocement spar, the platform and safety hull might exceed the designed lifespan of the spar enough to make replaceing the spar economically practical.
  • The platform is essentially in drydock during normal operations at sea, and can be easily inspected and maintained.
  • In this case, when the spar is nearing the end of life span, the seastead is moved to the final resting place of the spar,
  • The spar is stripped of everything useful and detached
  • It then begins it's final stage as a new artificial reef or island when it is released and scuttled.
  • Then the new spar is joined and life is interrupted as little as possible.
  • The Platform's central well would have to be designed a bit bigger than the spar' diameter, but fairly simple (but large!) screw jacks could be used to center and fasten the platform, while final welds are made.

 

Alternatively

Perhaps the spar is assembled vertically, but the safety hull platform (or most of the platform) are built at or near the bottom of the spar.

  • This reduces the stabiilty, but also the draft of the entire structure.
  • Essentially the platform is a fat donut around the middle or lower third of the spar for towing. The length of the spar, width and displacement of the platform determine whether this is feasible from a stability point of view, and exactly how shallow the draft can be reduced to.
  • The structure is towed out to depth, and the spar is ballasted to proper depth, sliding down through the ring ot the platform until it is locked in place, then the extra ballast is pumped out to raise the platform to its normal operating height.

 

The draft

The draft is the obstacle. In my mind it's a big one. This construction scenario might be feasible for a very small one but not for a seastead size, engineeringwise. Draft of this type will, IMHO, put the construction out of the realm of affordability.  There are very few to no moving platforms that do not take into account the eventuallity of contact with the bottom. (running aground).