Forum Replies Created
April 8, 2014 at 6:26 pm #23309
Khalifa port was not built because it has potential. It was built, as an ISLAND, to serve an existing purpose. The need for a larger, deeper, better sited commercial port existed. It was not built for potential.
Show me any reason someone would build any seastead off the south coast, east coast, or west coast of the usa. So far the only reason anyone has gone out there with big money is because there is proven oil to drill for, not because there is potential for it.April 7, 2014 at 4:04 pm #23305
A business development plan is key – not just floating out something…
But what business plan? There is no one out there to do business with. There is no reason to be out there, so selling space on seasteads is not a business model. You cannot build a city with individual underwater homes or businesses, how will you ever get out of the house or down to the business? I cannot wait on someone with a $billion to provide a place for me to be out there, because 1) they won’t do it, and 2) they’d charge more than i can pay. Maybe the people who with “no transcendence to a powerfull floating city” simply want to life peacefully with no political drama.
Edit: i think we need a way for people to rent/lease/buy Ocean’s scheme, modified so they can tolerate a small hurricane, or burn tons of fuel to outrun it.April 6, 2014 at 8:48 pm #23299
But Ellmer, you are going back to building Rome, or Venice, in a day, on one platform, ready for everyone to move in. It’s not going to happen.
What might happen is someone finds a way their family can be safe out on the water in all conditions, and another family rafts up, and then another family. And then hundreds of people. And then they are making money and decide to form a legal union and pool money like a condo, and make a single floatie big enough for all of them. This may not be the most efficient way to float 100 people at once on the water, but so far no one has build a safe floatie for a hurricane, or intentionally physically gathered 100 people to make one working society.April 6, 2014 at 12:03 am #23296
Ocean, i believe i can make a one killowatt water “windmill” cheaper than i can put up a kw of solar or wind generator. Plus the water flow there is unaffected by it being dark half the time. Solar panels work best if you want to stay put or go where you want, but if you can anchor you can put up windmills or watermills. If you cannot anchor, the wind and water will blow you around more than they will make power for you. That’s part of the charm of the Cay Sal, it’s not that deep that if you drop a mill you can retrieve it, it’s not coral so anchoring is permitted, it’s shallow enough that no ocean ships can get to you, and from what i hear it has a strong constant current in places.
But i was running some exciting numbers on a ever so slightly unrelated scheme involving concrete and slipforming and such, and i remember this thread, and Elan saying “or a cement anchor, a buoy and a leaky rowboat”, which implies a one-person seastead, and that person not being there for making trips to land for supplies or to make sales. So i was running numbers thru the calculators, and thought i’d see if this thread with Elan’s solo (and my solo) plan for a seastead somewhere west of the Cay Sal (which sorta includes the Gulf of Mexico), could be woken up again.
Lets say Elan and i find a way to make it possible for us to settle our separate little patches of the ocean, politely sharing the ocean with whoever is traveling thru. He has his buoy and stuff hanging off it, i have whatever i have and stuff floating all around it, and we need to make a trip to land. We cannot be in two places at once, so we must leave all our worldly possessions floating on the high seas, as we go buy toilet paper, ramen noodles, cheap wine, and sunblock, and perhaps sell seaweed or a swordfish or something. If Ocean has his houseboat parked off some lovely island in the Keys, and no one is aboard for 6 hours, he’s got the same problem: his tv and generator is going to disappear.
So what’s to stop anyone from stealing our buoys and radios and and other things while we are away? What’s to stop the USCG from declaring the seastead to be without a pilot, and sink our stuff? I don’t know about Elan’s stuff, but mine won’t work properly at the bottom of the ocean.April 4, 2014 at 6:26 pm #23294
Ocean, take note: In researching how to attach things to the floating concrete, i have seen 3 ways of doing approximately how this place does it. In common with post tensioning, the cable is threaded thru pvc pipe embedded in the pour, and the opening in each floatie is sealed as the pieces are pulled together. To aid replacing the cable if it deteriorates, the seals are also removeable and replaceable. For allowing movement, the cables are simply kept tensioned with springs. In the case of this company, the cables are in one plane and form a hinge to allow each section to float up and down with swells, but resist differential lateral motion. A deduction i made is the cable must thread thru the shell portion of the concrete, and not thru the crushable honeycomb portion (or the embedded poly foam). I also deduce the aluminum this company uses as the form perimeter is there so the top edge corner of the concrete is not damaged if the hinged joint is in the trough of a swell, which would place intense pressures and some rubbing motion on the top edge of the concrete. Essentially then, there is no concrete-to-concrete contact, the floats touch each other via the aluminum surround, which also would hold the fenders and any other accessories of the dock. And i deduce a “spring box” could be in each floatie for attaching to an existing floatie, without requiring an entire preexisting dock system be rethreaded, and this would be useful for semi-permanent dock-ups.
Now…… how is the aluminum surround kept in place on the concrete? Is it simply attached to aluminum rebar thru the pour to the aluminum on the opposite side? What about corrosion from the concrete and trapped salt water?April 4, 2014 at 4:38 pm #23293
I also ran across a more recent concrete barge, the oil drill “ship” Orlan :
The Orlan platform is being used to develop the southwestern flank of the main Chayvo zone from offshore. This reinforced-concrete substructure can easily withstand pressure from gigantic ice ridges that can reach as high as a six story building.
Links to Orlan here.April 4, 2014 at 4:13 pm #23292
I was just looking around for data on concrete/cement drydocks, use and construction methods, and found the following concerning drydocks in the early 1940′s in the usa:
ARDC Construction. — Eight of these docks were built on the East Coast, at Wilmington, N.C., and five of the West Coast, at San Pedro, Calif., in dry basins excavated for the purpose. Pile-supported platforms were constructed on which the hulls were built. Forms were of wood and masonite, and were held to close tolerances to avoid wide inaccuracies in fin displacement. Concrete was composed of stone or gravel aggregate, with about 8.4 bags of cement per yard and a water-cement ratio of five gallons per bag of cement to secure maximum density and a 28-day strength of more than 4,000 pounds per square inch. A total of 3,300 cubic yards of concrete was required for each dock.
ARDC Service. — Five of the self-contained docks of this class were towed to advance bases in the Pacific or to Pearl Harbor, where they were utilized with great success in the repair of many combat-damaged vessels. In service, these drydocks proved unexpectedly popular, because of their relatively great mass compared with their lifting capacity. This characteristic lowered the center of gravity and also made the dock exceptionally stable. It was not necessary to admit water into the wing walls to sink the docks, and additional space for machinery and quarters was thus made available. These docks also proved exceptionally watertight and required practically no hull maintenance.
The ARD docks, in particular, were fine freight carriers and seldom left for their overseas bases with an empty center chamber. On the contrary, they usually carried their own work barges, small boats, dredges, cranes, locomotives, piling, and other supplies too numerous to mention.
Near as i can tell, the basic concrete floating drydocks were more successful than the concrete ships, as no drydock was damaged in towing or in contact with other ships.April 3, 2014 at 9:14 pm #23290
Yes, you see it correctly in the top picture, the bottom picture is ~.040/1mm (no one believed i could stick weld such thin steel, but there’s tricks). The 1mm steel is pretty sturdy in the curves, you see the hammer laying there, i used to knock the bow into precise position on the pontoon before welding. I showed the pics because you said “The forming of round shapes (especially Sphere Habitats) is a bit tricky in steel plating”, but i can do it. So i figure if Ocean can stucco a wooden barge to protect it, i can make a nice looking steel floating whatever, and do the same. Honestly, i know i will not live forever, and my steel boat will not float forever, the cure will be to make my own “incubator for research” on the water, so i can make a semi-submergeable floating concrete drydock. Such a drydock would be very useful in making and launching new seasteads out where there is no interference. There have been successful concrete floating drydocks made.April 3, 2014 at 5:52 pm #23288
I’m going to keep an eye on Ocean, see how his cement barge things for the houseboat work. Nothing says i cannot experiment with cement after i am floating around.
I have cold bent 1/2 inch plate, and made a 4ft diameter, 10ft long, cylinder of 1/4 plate steel, and made the ribs for it:
And the bows of the little pontoons i made look truely awesome to me, seeing as how i made them of steel, all cold-formed (but the arc welding was hot, of course)
I designed, cut, welded, painted the 16ft pontoon boat, and the tilt-bed trailer for it. And i designed and built the overhead bridge crane that moves it all around. And the building it sits in.April 3, 2014 at 12:18 pm #23285
I went to the store a few days ago to buy fiber cement. They had decided to not sell it any more. I can’t keep fighting to have things my way, so i give up and will make my personal little floating castle of 100% steel. The steel is actually lighter, slightly cheaper, and i can disassemble it for transport to the water. Sure cement might last forever, but if i must put steel reenforcing in 1″/2.5cm cement, it’s not going to last much longer than if i used steel and no cement. And i do not need to wait up a week or three for it to set to strength. And the cement would never have the tensile strength of steel, an issue i was having problems with.April 1, 2014 at 9:56 am #23281
Ellmer, it’s as if you are using this forum only as a place to promote your own site.April 1, 2014 at 6:41 am #23278
Ellmer, floating-lagoon-house.jpg would look very pretty as Ocean’s shareware vacation houses behind the keys, but when a 5ft wave comes along all that carpet will get wet.
I was using the forum search to try and locate the url for Home Depot fiber cement which i had mentioned. I was at the store yesterday to buy some of the fiber cement, but they don’t have it anymore. They have a fiber concrete, which i don’t see as a good idea for making floaties with walls under 2 inches thick. The gravel in concrete is great for compressive strength, but gravel will simply clog up the pour in such a narrow mold, and i am wanting tensile strength. Anyhow, this forum’s search didn’t find me mentioning the fiber cement at Home Depot. It did find someone else making floaties (round balls) of a particular cement from Home Depot, and the store quit carrying that cement. The search also found everything we have been saying the last 6 months has been said here 6 years earlier.
So basically, what i have learned is: Adding portland makes the cement less porous, but it may shrink so much it cracks up in the mold (remove the mold asap?). Adding “mortar clay” will make the cement less porous, but no one sells it, and it may weaken the cement. Some cement advertised as “crack resistant” or “non-shrink” has reactive materials which create air bubbles, which is the same as saying “porous”. Glass fibers can be etched away by the alkalinity of the lime, so they must be coated the same as steel would be. Poly fibers stretch too much to be stable and permanent in salt water. If you can buy it today for a prototype, it will be unavailable after it has passed all tests you do on it. Marketting people will use different words for the same thing, or the same words for different things, and they will simply omit the important data, but they will say everything they sell is perfect for whatever you are doing.March 29, 2014 at 4:29 pm #23269
You gave the url
which gives the url
which is 404. The correct url is:
This all reminds me of a silica solution i used once to repair a cracked windshield. Silica has a close index of refraction as glass, and the crack became invisible when the liquid set up.March 29, 2014 at 4:21 pm #23268
Good stuff, Roger, thanks. I’d heard of manmade rock fibers (as in: not asbestos) used in various ways, but the energy input to make them seemed awefully high, is the situation different now? I had also heard of a liquid one could pour on sand that partially dissolved it, decades ago, before the internet, and when it “dried” could be used like a hard sandstone, and i had forgotten about it. I had heard someone had gone so far as set up a corporation to cast bricks from lava right at the volcano, but i have not heard of it in many years.March 27, 2014 at 10:18 pm #23258
The SR520 highway floating bridge cross section drawing is at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/993639C8-614E-4DD3-B8A1-B0926A8F9BF6/79646/PlannedBridge.jpg . Each pontoon is 360ft/110m long, 75ft/23m wide and 28ft/8.5m tall, and weigh 11,000 tons each. The standard anchor is 77 tons and deepest water under the bridge is 200ft/61m. And this bit of data: “Crews have repaired more than 30,000 linear feet of cracks since the 1993 Inaugural Day storm.”
Any idea how they will attach the steel deck supports to the concrete pontoons?
When i was pouring my house walls, i made a couple of stainless steel deck mounts, ~2 inches wide , 1/4 inch thick, and 7 inches long, with a hole drilled in each end. I set it in place as i was setting the rebar, with one stick of rebar thru one hole. The other end sticks out of the poured concrete for the deck to sit on and a bolt to pass thru the other hole. But i do not think this is the best way to attach to a cement boat hull, because wave motion will separate the steel from the cement where it enters the hull.