Re: Yet another paper

[Miguel Lamas Pardo]

Very well synthetized, Eelco!! My comments in red attached.

 

2010/5/5 Eelco Hoogendoorn <e.hoog...@seasteading.org>

 

Sure;

From: Francisco Fernando Quintanilha

Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 6:13 PM

To: Eelco Hoogendoorn ; Miguel Lamas Pardo ; fcfernando...@hotmail.com

Cc: Patri Friedman ; James Hogan

Subject: Re: Yet another paper

Hello all,

 

Eelo, I am not able to open this late file you sent. If possible send it to me in word or pdf.

 

Thank you

 

Fernando

----- Original Message -----

From: Eelco Hoogendoorn

To: Francisco Fernando Quintanilha ; Miguel Lamas Pardo ; fcfernando...@hotmail.com

Cc: Patri Friedman ; James Hogan

Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 1:06 PM

Subject: Yet another paper

 

Ive written a short summary of my current understanding of things, in an attempt to make sure we are all on the same page, and if not, where we diverge. It does contain some statements which are still under active debate (mooring/wave directionality), so note this is just my current understanding, which is always open to new information.

 

Comments/corrections very much welcome!

 

Eelco

--
Miguel Lamas, Engineering Research
The Seasteading Institute
www.seasteading.org

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TSI Engineering Advisors" group.
To post to this group, send email to tsi-engineer...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tsi-engineering-ad...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tsi-engineering-advisors?hl=en.

[Eelco Hoogendoorn]

 

Thanks a lot for the quick feedback!

 

 

One thing I should indeed probably change: Mooring wave-opaque structures such as a long barge to waves from any direction might indeed well be possible at a seamount; the shallow waters might make mooring sufficiently affordable that this problem can simply get a 'brute force' solution.

 

However, im not sure about the 4.5m figure. The picture is a snapshot of a particular moment, right? Worst case conditions might be a lot worse than that 4.5m. For instance, 7m is the max Hs for clubstead in a 100 years; that is at the very tail of the spectrum of possibilities. 4.5m or worse is even fairly rare there, occuring less than 4% of the time.

 

The waves are probably not so bad as to pose unsurmountable strength/survivability problems for the structure, perhaps not for the mooring either, but if waves are significantly worse than for the clubstead location, I am worried about comfort in a monohul, especially if it cannot weathervane. We hope to be able to do *not much worse* than Clubstead in clubstead location. Going from semi to monhul is already a step back; adding rougher waves on top worries me.

 

 

But indeed, ampere seamount is a very promising location in all other aspects. It would be great if we could find a comprehensive source of informations regarding worst case waves.

 

Eelco