Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Share
    avatar
    jhelb

    Posts : 433
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  jhelb on Mon Jun 06, 2016 9:07 pm

    George1 wrote:Sixth Varshavyanka-class sub for Black Sea Fleet launched in Petersburg

    Russia will build diesel-electric submarines for the Pacific Fleet, fifth-generation conventional submarines for the Northern and Baltic fleets

    George, since you keep track of all the latest development in the Russia, I had one question. A couple of yers ago there were several reports about a lot of R & D & some mature technology demonstrations on propulsors done in Russia.

    Given the fact that Pump-Jet Propulsor & MHD-based drives are the way of the future how soon can we see Russian subs with these features? (France has already incorporated it in the Shortfin Barracuda that it is selling to Australia) Thanks.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1570
    Points : 1608
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon Jun 06, 2016 9:54 pm

    jhelb wrote: George, since you keep track of all the latest development in the Russia, I had one question. A couple of yers ago there were several reports about  a lot of R & D & some mature technology demonstrations on propulsors done in Russia.

    Given the fact that  Pump-Jet Propulsor & MHD-based drives are the way of the future how soon can we see Russian subs with these features?  (France has already incorporated it in the Shortfin Barracuda that it is selling to Australia) Thanks.




    I see a conventional propeller here no pumpjets. MHD? anybody isntelled this yet? What a Face

    Singular_trafo

    Posts : 130
    Points : 128
    Join date : 2016-04-16

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Singular_trafo on Mon Jun 06, 2016 10:09 pm

    jhelb wrote:
    George1 wrote:Sixth Varshavyanka-class sub for Black Sea Fleet launched in Petersburg

    Russia will build diesel-electric submarines for the Pacific Fleet, fifth-generation conventional submarines for the Northern and Baltic fleets

    George, since you keep track of all the latest development in the Russia, I had one question. A couple of yers ago there were several reports about a lot of R & D & some mature technology demonstrations on propulsors done in Russia.

    Given the fact that Pump-Jet Propulsor & MHD-based drives are the way of the future how soon can we see Russian subs with these features? (France has already incorporated it in the Shortfin Barracuda that it is selling to Australia) Thanks.

    Pump jet creating an optimal speed range, so doesn't make so much sense for a diesel sub. It wants to go as fast as possible when using diesel, and can't go fast anyway on batteries.
    avatar
    jhelb

    Posts : 433
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  jhelb on Tue Jun 07, 2016 9:08 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:I see a conventional propeller here no pumpjets. MHD? anybody isntelled this yet?

    DCNS had stated that the Australian Shortfin Barracuda will have Pump Jet propeller. Re MHD, like I said Russia was working on it as was France & Japan. I don't think it has been installed on any sub yet. Back in 1990, the Soviet Union tried to fit a pump-jet of 5,500 hp to one of the Kilos of Black Sea fleet, with the designation 877V

    Singular_trafo wrote:Pump jet creating an optimal speed range, so doesn't make so much sense for a diesel sub. It wants to go as fast as possible when using diesel, and can't go fast anyway on batteries.

    Pump jets are indeed heavier, but so much quieter. The big advantage pump jets offer is providing the submarine with a higher tactical 'silent speed'. A conventional propeller submarine may have a silent speed of 7 to 9 knots, the pump jet submarine much higher - speculating in the 'teen' speeds or more

    Singular_trafo

    Posts : 130
    Points : 128
    Join date : 2016-04-16

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Singular_trafo on Tue Jun 07, 2016 6:18 pm

    jhelb wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:I see a conventional propeller here no pumpjets. MHD? anybody isntelled this yet?

    DCNS had stated that the Australian Shortfin Barracuda will have Pump Jet propeller. Re MHD, like I said Russia was working on it as was France & Japan. I don't think it has been installed on any sub yet. Back in 1990, the Soviet Union tried to fit a pump-jet of 5,500 hp to one of the Kilos of Black Sea fleet, with the designation 877V

    Singular_trafo wrote:Pump jet creating an optimal speed range, so doesn't make so much sense for a diesel sub. It wants to go as fast as possible when using diesel, and can't go fast anyway on batteries.

    Pump jets are indeed heavier, but so much quieter. The big advantage pump jets offer is providing the submarine with a higher tactical 'silent speed'. A conventional propeller submarine may have a silent speed of 7 to 9 knots, the pump jet submarine much higher - speculating in the 'teen' speeds or more

    The pump jet increase the required power for the same speed for a sub.

    The increase of speed require three magintude more power, so if the sub can go 200 km with one charge then by doubling its speed it can go for 25km.


    Means that a pump jet diesel sub can be used only for short dashing, not for partoling.

    Singular_trafo

    Posts : 130
    Points : 128
    Join date : 2016-04-16

    Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Singular_trafo on Wed Jun 08, 2016 6:13 pm

    Singular_trafo wrote:
    jhelb wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:I see a conventional propeller here no pumpjets. MHD? anybody isntelled this yet?

    DCNS had stated that the Australian Shortfin Barracuda will have Pump Jet propeller. Re MHD, like I said Russia was working on it as was France & Japan. I don't think it has been installed on any sub yet. Back in 1990, the Soviet Union tried to fit a pump-jet of 5,500 hp to one of the Kilos of Black Sea fleet, with the designation 877V

    Singular_trafo wrote:Pump jet creating an optimal speed range, so doesn't make so much sense for a diesel sub. It wants to go as fast as possible when using diesel, and can't go fast anyway on batteries.

    Pump jets are indeed heavier, but so much quieter. The big advantage pump jets offer is providing the submarine with a higher tactical 'silent speed'. A conventional propeller submarine may have a silent speed of 7 to 9 knots, the pump jet submarine much higher - speculating in the 'teen' speeds or more

    The pump jet increase the required power for the same speed for a sub.

    The increase of speed require three magintude more power, so if the sub can go 200 km with one charge then by doubling its speed it can go for 25km.


    Means that a pump jet diesel sub can be used only for short dashing, not for partoling.

    Sorry, my mistake.I should spend a bit more to think andcalculate prior of writing. : )

    The reqired power of the motor increasing cubicaly with speed, the range decreasing by sqare of the speed.

    so twive as high speed means quoter the range, so from 200 km to 50 km.
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Tue Jul 05, 2016 5:47 pm

    very interesting video , 3 options for increase in underwater range. LI -batteries that store more energy , reformer that extracts hydrogen from diesel so no hydrogen storage needed for Fuel cell and more oxygen can be stored, and steam engine using fuel+ stored oxygen,  and ocean for cooling.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqSMs9xTNyQ

    i guess pumpjet is not used in conventional subs because they already move at lower tactical speeds where there is no danger of cavitation compared to nuclear, and because pumpjet is draggy.
    china lareayd has type 032 largest conventional submarine which is over 6.000t submerged.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 795
    Points : 813
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Big_Gazza on Wed Jul 06, 2016 12:45 am

    Rmf wrote:very interesting video , 3 options for increase in underwater range. LI -batteries that store more energy , reformer that extracts hydrogen from diesel so no hydrogen storage needed for Fuel cell and more oxygen can be stored, and steam engine using fuel+ stored oxygen,  and ocean for cooling.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqSMs9xTNyQ

    i guess pumpjet is not used in conventional subs because they already move at lower tactical speeds where there is no danger of cavitation compared to nuclear, and because pumpjet is draggy.
    china lareayd has type 032 largest conventional submarine which is over 6.000t submerged.

    Its generally believed that Russian AIP efforts are going towards using a diesel-fed reformator feeding a fuel cell, which accounts for the fairly protracted development. Its a good technology, and well worth the wait.

    Agreed re the use of pump-jets on SSKs. It's not worth it, as the trials on Alrosa have shown.
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Thu Jul 07, 2016 7:43 pm

    `well hydrogen is to be avoided as stored - risky ,hard to contain , boils off, large volume ,and mass of tanks.
    oxygen benefits from high density , easier storage temperatures , low boil off technologies (developed for space) less then 1% per month , you can use deep cooled slush form to buy some time ,etc...

    so they used small steam turbine or sterling engine to burn diesel fuel and oxygen in todays AIP.

    not bad , using ocean water 4C degrees for cooling part means its ok. but your efficiency is below 40%.

    with this new fuel cell that extracts hydrogen from diesel, you get to over 70% and -no noise ,vibrations ,moving parts, complexity etc....

    fuel cell use chemical - electrical cycle so its inherently better ,then chemical-heat-mechanical-electric , steam turbines.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 795
    Points : 813
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Jul 08, 2016 3:02 am

    Rmf wrote:`well hydrogen is to be avoided as stored - risky ,hard to contain , boils off,  large volume ,and mass of tanks.
    oxygen benefits from high density , easier storage temperatures , low boil off technologies (developed for space)  less then 1% per month , you can use deep cooled slush form to buy some time ,etc...

    so they used small steam turbine or sterling engine to burn diesel fuel and oxygen in todays AIP.

    not bad , using ocean water 4C degrees for cooling part means its ok. but your efficiency is below 40%.

    with this new fuel cell that extracts hydrogen from diesel, you get to over 70% and -no noise ,vibrations ,moving parts, complexity etc....

    fuel cell use chemical - electrical cycle so its inherently better ,then chemical-heat-mechanical-electric , steam turbines.

    Agree 100%, and fuel cells are the penultimate power generation technology for SSKs.  Any form of combustion engine/turbine technology is the wrong end of the stick as they are inherent noise generators (though acoustic dampening tech has come a LONG way, especially the field of noise suppression by active wave superposition).  The difficulty is being able to build them compact so that a useful energy output can be achieved within the limited confines of a manned submersible, and to make them reliable.
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:19 pm

    ...if they are using luquid oxygen there for AIP fuell cell, they could use cooling for high temperature superconductors for propeller engine - significant reduction in mass and weight + 99% efficient from 1 rpm - 600 rpm.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jul 25, 2016 10:50 am

    Smile

    RMF... you talk about storing hydrogen on board a sub as problematic and then you talk about storing oxygen without mentioning it is vastly more problematic and outright dangerous.

    `well hydrogen is to be avoided as stored - risky ,hard to contain , boils off, large volume ,and mass of tanks.
    oxygen benefits from high density , easier storage temperatures , low boil off technologies (developed for space) less then 1% per month , you can use deep cooled slush form to buy some time ,etc...

    Pure hydrogen is totally inert... it is only hazardous if you get the mix of hydrogen and oxygen correct to get fire. You need very very specific conditions to get an explosion... surround the hydrogen tank with nitrogen and it should be totally safe.

    Pure oxygen will burn at the smallest spark and you wont be able to put it out. It turns anything that will burn at normal air pressure and normal temperatures into an explosive under pressure in an oxygen rich environment.

    Incredibly dangerous.

    Regarding the process of extracting the needed chemicals from Diesel... first of all it is genius because every port able to support a submarine will already have the infrastructure to supply diesel... while a hydrogen fuel cell AIP requires pure hydrogen which means all new infrastructure for all of your ports... and foreign ports you want your subs to operate from.

    Note I am not saying you are wrong about storing hydrogen, but storing oxygen is vastly more complicated and lead to use of things like HTP for slightly safer storage.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Tue Jul 26, 2016 9:44 pm

    usualy for supeconductors liquid nitrogen is used, and its used anyway as surface layer for liqud oxygen storage and tank flushing.
    hydrogen is vastly more complicated to store and contain.
    if sub is using cryogenics anyway it could store some extra nitrogen for submarine propeller motor. that motor would be very small. liquid nytrogen is -200c liquid and oxygen is -220c.
    http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/01/365-megawatt-superconducting-motor.html
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 27, 2016 11:25 am

    But the point in terms of danger, Nitrogen is inert and apart from being under pressure and very cold is no real danger to the crew. Hydrogen is not much worse in the sense that it needs oxygen to burn and underwater there is not much available oxygen... especially if stored outside the internal hull and surrounded by water.

    Oxygen on the other hand is always dangerous and the smallest spark can start a fire that very few things on earth or in space or in water could stop.

    A fire needs fuel and oxygen and heat... water normally is excellent for putting out something like paper on fire because it stops oxygen getting to the flame, it cools down the hot material and can turn fuel materials like wood or paper into non fuel materials that wont burn unless extremely hot.

    A LOX fire combines fuel and oxygen in one in such a vigorous fire that even water wont stop it. LOX will burn underwater or in a vacuum... that is why LOX is a component of rocket fuel... liquid hydrogen practically explodes in LOX.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Wed Jul 27, 2016 10:16 pm

    point is oxygen is a must for any AIP so i really dont know what your babble is about....
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:32 am

    My problem is that if you think Hydrogen is a problem to store and handle then LOX is a PITA.

    The best compromise is to store it as HTP and "release" it when needed.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:03 pm

    yeah HTP in submarines and torpedoes was always a great idea -not Rolling Eyes Shocked Mad No
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 31, 2016 10:26 am

    Much safer that LOX.

    As long as HTP is kept away from catalysts it can pretty much be treated like water.

    LOX is always dangerous.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:39 pm

    `yes yes ,much safer , thats why all the navies in the world have given up on it.... Laughing
    htp stores many times less oxygen per volume as liquid oxygen.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 03, 2016 12:23 pm

    htp stores many times less oxygen per volume as liquid oxygen.

    True, but HTP stores energy in two forms... let it flow through a catalyst and a lot of heat and O2 is released... the heat can be used to drive a turbine and generate electricity directly and the O2 can be used in any number of ways to generate electricity...

    LOX stores O2 is a volatile form that could explode at any time.

    `yes yes ,much safer , thats why all the navies in the world have given up on it....

    No they have not.

    And what navies of the world carry LOX in tanks on submarines?

    As I have been saying LOX is much less safe that liquid hydrogen or HTP.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Wed Aug 03, 2016 8:06 pm


    anyway nice derail of topic , i wont argue anymore ,just to spite other users your inventing stuff and twisting words ,your lack of knowledge is astounding...instead of admitting you dont have a clue.
    typical know-it-all-guy.... htp is safer and better , look at submarine record who used it, even in torpedoes its not used Laughing Laughing
    and O2 from liquid oxygen is less safe then super hot steam and O2 from peroxide, sure Sad
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 04, 2016 1:33 pm

    Yeah, make it personal.

    O2 is the most flammable material there is even a static spark can cause combustion, and in a pure O2 environment there is no such thing as a fire... material that burns in normal conditions in a pure O2 environment explode.

    And you think hydrogen peroxide is MORE dangerous to store.

    Keep it away from a catalyst and it is just like water.

    Cryogenic O2 from LOX is just as dangerous to human tissue as super hot steam from hydrogen peroxide.

    And your claim that no navies use HTP is rubbish because not all navies are western navies.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Rmf on Sat Aug 06, 2016 8:56 am

    yes and gasoline is just like water ,as long as there is no flames its perfectly safe , - thats how riculous your claim is.... go around world navies and tell them to reintroduce hydrogen peroxide Laughing
    liquid oxygen is used commercially in every place stored in steel dewart bottles and tanks, and it is used in submarines outside pressure hull( any boiloff is less then 5% per month!!! is vented into ocean) , not to mention hot O2 from htp would damage fuell cell unlike cool oxygen , you have no clue and still sinking furhter ....
    https://www.google.rs/?gws_rd=ssl#q=liquid+oxygen+tank+types
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 06, 2016 12:24 pm

    [qutoe]yes and gasoline is just like water ,as long as there is no flames its perfectly safe[/quote]

    Yes... actually it is like water... Petrol is a fuel but to actually burn it needs oxygen... without it it is harmless.

    Hydrogen is the same... without large amounts of oxygen Hydrogen is either a very high pressure gas or super cooled gas, which means not as safe as water but not as volatile as LOX which is both super cold and also an extreme fire hazard.

    - thats how riculous your claim is.... go around world navies and tell them to reintroduce hydrogen peroxide

    The Russian navy never withdrew its HTP powered torpedoes.

    Might come as a shock, but the chemicals that fuel SLBMs are rather more volatile and more dangerous and also more toxic than Hydrogen Peroxide.

    liquid oxygen is used commercially in every place stored in steel dewart bottles and tanks, and it is used in submarines outside pressure hull( any boiloff is less then 5% per month!!! is vented into ocean) , not to mention hot O2 from htp would damage fuell cell unlike cool oxygen , you have no clue and still sinking furhter ....

    Speaking of no clue, stored in the fuel tank of a torpedo, HTP is no more dangerous than a Li ion battery... which can also explode if mishandled BTW.

    The HTP in a torpedo is inert when kept away from a catalyst and when the HTP is doing its job of powering the torpedo who cares if it damages a fuel cell? Hot drives a turbine that propels the torpedo through the water... Hot is good.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Singular_trafo

    Posts : 130
    Points : 128
    Join date : 2016-04-16

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Singular_trafo on Tue Aug 09, 2016 7:13 pm

    Quite interesting topic, I mean the question of the most effective non nuclear , air independent power source : )

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density_Extended_Reference_Table

    Hydrogen + oxigen energy density : 13.43 Mj/kg
    H2Oh (hydrogen peroxyde) energy density - as monopropelant : 2.7 Mj/kg
    Lithium ion energy density is 0.5 Mj/kg, lead acid is 0.14 Mj/kg.


    all data down here aprox , from the top of my head.
    The efficiency of the hydrogen fueal cell can be 60-90% , the efficiency of a swassplate engine around 20-30% for H2O2.

    The problematic is the hydrogen storage, the density of the liquid H2 is 70 kg/cubic meter, and the boiling point is under the freezing point of the liquid oxigen, so it needs good heat insulation on the separator plate as well.

    The hydrogen - air will detonate int the 5-95% range , so it is one of the most dangerous gases.


    Carbohydrogen based fuel cell has very bad efficiency, it is way better if an internal combustion engine burn the fuel.

    I have to menation that you can buy liquid oxigen by truckload, but no company on the earth will deliver to anyone liquid hydrogen.
    All industrial hydrogen generated on site, by partialy oxidating the natural gas.



    Sponsored content

    Re: Marine propulsion technology for SSKs

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:37 pm