Resurgam Submarine

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

Hello Len

I am a little confused with the Resurgam and have quite a few niggling questions for you…

How much sea time did Resurgam undergo?

What distance was it underwater for?

What was special about the boiler and coal burner?

If it was a Dynamic diving machine, why are you blowing air into it, during your bath trials?

Why did the Admiralty like the idea?……Being a dynamic diver etc…..Was there an improvement in mind?

Thanks a lot…..Bob

[Len Morris 2Participant @lenmorris2]

Hi Bob. Resurgam is very much an enigma and I suspect I have more niggling questions than you do! I am no expert and can only answer your questions from what I've read and my own analysis.

The literature tells us that Resurgam left Liverpool and arrived in Rhyl with an exhausted crew after some 36 hours. The sea distance is about 36 miles so without being pedantic she managed an average speed of one knot! This would be a useless speed for a dynamic diving machine and indeed dangerous given the currents in the area. I hate assumptions but suspect she spent a lot of time wallowing.

I have no idea how long she was 'underwater' but contemporary reports would have you believe it was for the duration of the voyage. Not so. At best, she would have to surface about every four hours to reheat the boiler and replenish steam. Perhaps this was her wallowing time and she could manage say 4 knots underway. Resurgam's natural waterline with the propeller just submerged leaves very little structure above the surface. In any sea swell at all she would be submerged!

The steam engine is reported to have been based on Lamm's fire-less locomotive design. Get the boiler up to temperature, insulate, condense and recycle. Top up steam pressure from a static industrial boiler as required. Basically use the latent heat in the water of the boiler as the energy source. Very popular in the US and the UK for underground railways.. Ok on land for about 4 hours, then it was back to the boiler plant to recharge. For Resurgam it would have been surface and re-fire the furnace for a recharge.

As regards my own model Bob I've had enough of dynamic diving! I don't want to have to rush around the boat pond with an already half submerged model just to get it to go under. In addition, Resurgams hydroplanes are in the wrong place (as Nordenfeldt observed when Garrett joined his company). Here I claim model maker's rights. From the out side she will look like Resurgam to the best of my abilities but she needs to work. On my model the timber cladding area is a ballast tank, but you would never know it. None of this actually detracts from a simulation of the performance of the full sized Resurgam. I wonder how the hydroplanes will perform.

I cannot comment on the Admiralty's thoughts other than at the time submarine's were despised. Garrett certainly had a job to do!

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

Thank you, Len

A Calcium Carbide powered sub with RC control would be interesting and of the right era too

I realise it wouldn't do much compared to the modern subs, but it's performance would be contemporary with the Resugam and a complete novelty

Just a nice daydream

Bob

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

Hello Len

Just look what I`ve found!……….

**LINK**

This looks very interesting, could be the very book that I used all those years ago!

Just wondering if the pressure generated, could it be dangerous?

A nice read anyway

Bob

[David WooleyParticipant @davidwooley82563]

hello Len The Resurgam according to the information I have was four and half tons . The boiler 45inches in diameter and 144 inches long operating at 130psi As a matter of interest Resurgam was Garrett's idea but constructed by JT Cochran of Birkenhead and the engineering drawings by Cochran's draughtsman Jack Aitkin. Great to see a diving model of this famous submarine .It is said that Hyman G Rickover was the farther of the nuclear submarine , then Garrett could claim to be the grandfather as both the USS Nautilus and Resurgam relied on steam power . As a further twist of fate the man in charge of the reactor program for Nautilus was an Engineer with the name of Cochran .

Dave Wooley

[Keith LongParticipant @keithlong89920]

I think I'd be more worried about having a carbide powered sub with RC gear inside, than the risk of over pressuring the tin can. The gas carbide gives off with water is acetylene. Residual air in the can plus acetylene and a spark from the RC – you might have difficulty in finding the sub again!

Carbide is still available in the UK quite freely – look for a supplier of equipment for cavers, they use it in helmet lamps still as it doesn't rely on batteries, so good for a back up lighting source.

Keith

[Len Morris 2Participant @lenmorris2]

Bob! What a piece of gold dust! A classic 'Boys' own Paper' type article about how to make something quiet brilliant out of nothing! You've set a hare running now. I've got to make one! With brain in overdrive, I estimated the model should only take 2 or 3 evening to complete, but where do you get carbide from these days? Well, out of the blue, Keith joined the discussion with some excellent information (thanks Keith). I have one concern and it's the effect of acetylene on aquatic life. Need to do a bit of research.

Now back to Resurgam, Dave is absolutely right to compare Resurgam with Nukes. They just have different fuels in the boiler! Whether Garrett is the 'grandfather' might be argued by some. Marciso Monturiol (1819-1887) built the Ictineo II Spanish submarine in 1865, predating Resurgam by some 14 years. She had two 'steam' engines. A conventional arrangement for surface running and a closed circuit ammonia engine for submerged operation. The history and details of a superb model built by Rene Lefevre are described in the March 2010 edition of Marine Modelling International.

Just to keep the record straight, Garrett's scale model weighed some 4.5 tons. Resurgam herself weighed approximately 30 tons.

Now, where's my soldering iron and who do I know who goes potholing……..

Best Regards, Len

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

Hello Len

I couldn't believe my eyes when the sub plan showed up!….Glad you liked it

Can't really believe that Carbide is sold over the counter these days, it must be highly volatile and dangerous

They seem to make some sort of cannon with it too

Bob

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Len

A link to BASF data sheet on acetylene.

**LINK**

And a link to a data sheet on Calcium Carbide

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDgQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ge-mcs.com%2Fdownload%2Fmoisture-humidity%2FCaC2-SafetyDataSheet2005.pdf&ei=PPkZU8hzy57sBvCrgcgM&usg=AFQjCNEDRVh7dYKehvHJHXIcTIS11S5Z-Q&sig2=IYw4XwaMG2I8Q7LWelIrcw

 

Paul

 

Edited By Paul T on 07/03/2014 16:57:17

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

Thank you, Paul

Reading the calcium blurb, I'd say that it's a no go situation…Without a doubt?

We could try Sherbet?

Bob

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

A very interesting article Bob. Yes, calcium carbide does look to be a delicate substance but then so were Jetex motors in their day. Dealing with these sort of materials did give a degree of caution and understanding of working with hazardous materials which is absent in this day and age which is why there are now so many rules and regulations to stop people from doing anything that might place them in potential danger while at the same time removing the need for them to think for themselves.

Colin

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Bob

You could try something less volatile ……..like nitro-glycerine or amatol.

Paul

[Len Morris 2Participant @lenmorris2]

Paul, thanks for the link on acetylene. For all reading this thread it says "calculations suggest the substance to be acutely harmful to aquatic life". It's a definite no go! End of.

I have some cheap little plastic subs that use Sodium Bicarbonate to go up and down. Might work, but would I put one in my pet fish tank? No way! Again, end of!

Back to Resurgam. I need to blow the ballast tanks and I've gone through all the options. The model of Ictineo II by Rene Lefevre used butane. Not so sure. Air horns and air brush cans use CFC's. Again not so sure. Eventually I decided that if I'm happy to put it in my fish tank it's the way to go, compressed air.

Sorry Len but I don't think we can leave your suggested solution online! As Paul says below, there must be safer ways of using compressed air! – Colin

Len

Edited By Colin Bishop, Website Editor on 08/03/2014 16:41:14

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Len

I strongly urge caution in finding a suitable pressure container  Using an unsuitable type could result in catastrophic failure. (original text edited)

I would suggest that if you find a compressed gas storage vessel that has been specifically designed for repetitive use.

Paul

 

 

Edited By Colin Bishop, Website Editor on 08/03/2014 16:44:28

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

What about those compressed air cylinders that are used in Paint Ball guns?

Bob

[Len Morris 2Participant @lenmorris2]

Hi Bob, that was a good useful comment! Having Googled the morning away I'm very much wiser. They are not compressed air cylinders but CO2 at 900 psi. I hadn't thought about CO2. Loads of applications in all different sizes. Soda syphons, Sparklet bulbs, air rifles etc. The best are bicycle tyre inflators aimed at the off road mountain bikers. They are ideally sized to fit in the the hull and will give up to 30 re-surfacings from a depth of 6 feet. Best of all, they are quite inexpensive and have a sensitive control valve. Don't ride a bike so never knew they existed! My target running depth is only 6 inches to maintain R/C control so I should get 40 dives out of one cylinder. I have an electronic gizmo that blows the tanks if R/C is lost for more than 4 seconds. The blow at 6 feet is a mechanical emergency recovery using a diaphragm pressure switch from an old washing machine.

Best Regards, Len

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

Sounds like a promising solution Len and a safe, easily controllable one too. We look forward to your further adventures!

It's often the case that a bit of lateral thinking and research can solve a problem. For example, model railway suppliers stock lots of materials and products which can be very useful to model boaters but few people think to check them out.

Colin

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

Just a thought, chaps………Is Carbon Dioxide heavy?

Bob

[Gareth JonesParticipant @garethjones79649]

It's heavier than air but a lot lighter than water.

[Bob Abell 2Participant @bobabell2]

Thank you, Garerth

But what if it is compressed into a liquid?……….Gotcher!

Bob

[Gareth JonesParticipant @garethjones79649]

If it's a liquid its density is about 1250 kg / cubic meter which is about 25 % denser than water – but it will expand about 850 times in volume if you let it boil back into a gas.

Gareth

[Len Morris 2Participant @lenmorris2]

Hi every body, thanks for your responses. Colin was dead right! Visited the local model shop which is totally model railways and picked up some super supplies including the fake rivet heads for the superstructure. Also have done a tour of the local bike shops and the CO2 inflaters are ideal. The basic unit provides the valve head and one 16 gm cylinder for about a tenner. I need to manifold together about 5 cylinders to have the correct weight on board for some 70 blows (80 gms of CO2). Simple engineering and an advantage as the small cylinders can be placed where space is available (the replacement cylinders are about £3.50 each).

In case it helps anybody else, here's how I know how much CO2 I need ( all approximate numbers). A cubic meter of CO2 weighs 1.9 kgs at standard atmospheric temperature and pressure (STP). If I can carry 0.080 kgs in the cylinders then dividing one weight into the other gives me the volume of gas I have available at STP. Pressure in water increases at about half a PSI per foot so we now have to apply good old Boyle's law P1V1=P2V2. Assuming a ridiculous depth of 6 feet (no R/c contact – no vision) then my water pressure is 3 PSI. So P1 is my standard atmospheric pressure of 14,7 PSI. V1 is my STP volume. P2 is my dived pressure of 17.7 PSI and V2 is the number I'm want, which is the volume of gas available 6 feet down. Divide this number bt the volume of the ballast tanks and you have the number of re-surfaceings from a bad situation!

CO2 is funny stuff. It will not liquefy at normal temperatures. It needs to be very cold ( minus 50 to 80 degree region) and under a lot of pressure. At atmospheric pressure it can exist as a solid (dry ice) or a gas, there is no liquid phase. The technical terms are 'triple point' and 'sublimation' if any one wants to follow this up. However, all this tells me is that the CO2 cylinders contain gas and that there might be a possibility of recharging the system from a pub gas CO2 cylinder!

Back to Resurgam. Whilst the internals are being planned I'm working on the externals. How many portholes did Resurgam have? Pictures clearly show one in the 'conning tower' to starboard and hence (assumption) one to port. What about straight ahead and astern. Also there is an impression of something on the bow sections.

Best Regards Len

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

Logically the conning position would have had 4 portholes to give the helmsman an all round view. None of the easily obtainable photos show this in any detail though.

Colin

[Bob WilsonParticipant @bobwilson59101]

You can still get carbide on Ebay, but it can be pretty dangerous stuff, as it can build up pressure very quickly and it can quite easily become a case of "boomsville" if you are not careful!!!

Bob

[Len Morris 2Participant @lenmorris2]

Dear Bob, thanks for that. Not too bothered about "boomsville" but am bothered about killing aquatic life so I'm not following that route any more. As posted CO2 seems the most practical option and the sub will use less than pulling 2 pints of beer so my environmental conscience is clear. Regards, Len.

[Author]

Posts