Re: some links

[Miguel Lamas Pardo]

My ideas confirmed about the suit of CSS design for offshore accomodation !! First flotel designed as per CSS design recently contracted:

http://www.oilpubs.com/oso/article.asp?v1=9503

 

The CSS Concept has taken five years to get to today’s position; from the original concept sketched on A4 paper, to the MODU coded design of today which will change the way the offshore industry works.

 

You can see a good example of innovate structures: 5 years from first design drafts to a design approved by a Classification Society as per MODU code. And then 2 years and a half of construction period. And it is not a so innovate structure !!!!  Only a version of compact semi-submersible vessel.

 

Unfortunately, I was not able of finding the contract price.

 

2010/7/14 Miguel Lamas Pardo <mla...@seasteading.org>

 

Everything could be interesting but not so useful for seasteading:

 

- In general Bridge Technology is an state of the art of concrete building, but I think that for seasteading purposes, examples of offshore concrete platforms are more useful.

 

- SLICE: same as Eelco; it is a design for saling at high speeds in not big waves. As commented some months ago, something similar, but designed for big waves in Dynamic Positiong is the CSS: Compact Semi-Submersible: http://www.hallinmarine.com/Vessels/concept-vessels.htm

 

2010/7/14 Eelco Hoogendoorn <e.hoog...@seasteading.org>

 

Dumping lots of concrete in the water is the only way of dealing with sea-ice that im aware of; not one that is compatible with DG.

 

As far as the fancy hulls are concerned: my general impression is that they offer horrible cost per square meter, and are primarily aimed at moving fast in typical not-too-rough fairly short wavelength coastal waters. It doesnt seem like an efficient solution to the problem of providing a mostly static platform in the open ocean. I cant say ive looked at it in great detail, but I feel confident enough about that not to feel inclined to do so either.

 

From: Patri Friedman

Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:38 PM

To: Eelco Hoogendoorn ; Miguel Lamas Pardo

Subject: some links

that may or may not have relevance for our designs - you tell me :).

Longest bridge over icy water in the world, 13km, "post-tensioned concrete"

http://www.confederationbridge.com/en/design_construction.php

SLICE, a variant of SWATH: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/sea-slice.htm

described to me as: "The key difference between SWATH and SLICE being that SWATH technology is based upon a submerged twin hull catamaran-like design, which subjects the vessel to lateral waves.  Whereas the SLICE technology is based upon 4 independent struts that extend underwater to 4 individual ballasted hulls, thus making it comparatively less susceptible to waves coming from the side."

Are SWATH designs being considered by either of you, as a way to get low current drag, reasonable mobility, but better wave performance?  The major disadvantage is that we'd have to have the ship custom built instead of buying a used one, since there aren't a lot of SWATHs out there.

--
Patri Friedman, Executive Director
The Seasteading Institute
www.seasteading.org