[QUOTE=TroubledByThis;33551]I joined to share, but I’m a minnow here. For weeks I’ve monitored this forum from outside since I found it linked to a wiki on Deepwater Horizon. I’d been troubled by the magnitude of sinking such a vessel with oil. Along the way, a quick “invention” that popped in my head as they often do. I don’t want to barge into your orderly forum saying, [I]“Hey, look at MY idea!”[/I] I’m the kind who will simply walk up to the Captain and say, [I]“When you get a chance, I wish you’d trouble yourself to look over my proposal which seems so simple it’s overlooked.”[/I] But John, our working “Captain”, has a full mailbox. I tried to go through proper chain of command.
I wonder honestly if the reason [I]“THEY” [/I]havenot bothered to do better in their efforts thus far is because it’s going to get MUCH worse soon. Yelling fire in a theater is not wise. But putting that out of my mind, I can’t imagine why my simple concept (in my video) couldn’t be made to work. I wish someone could assure me that my idea is not worth considering. Perhaps there are other similar oil suction dredge systems working already. If this message is sound, I can offer another style video or proposal details as requested. You folks must know more than me. I’ve envisioned all sorts of modifications in the weeks I’ve pondered this all-too-simple concept of a [U]“bubble lift”[/U] or [U]“suction dredge”[/U] Surely it’s a bad idea for some reason, right? Respectfully, here’s my video for what it’s worth, I TRY and save this good vessel, Sirs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB2qgOAsOLo
or http://videos.nola.com/2010/05/bp_oil_spill_catastrophy_easy.html
On Youtube, I am 1236bigcat. I added music for appeal to the folks around the area, southern folk rock. Thanks for what you good folks do, and I mean to do all I can do. I NEVER mean to steer our good ship off a prudent heading. If I am wrong I wish to be corrected. Laugh at me if you wish. I’ve never worked around the oil industry. This is my first post, and maybe my last. Remove this post if I seem out of place, seriously. Thanks.[/QUOTE]
A constructive idea except that the pipe you have in mind is far to flimsy ie too flexible and not sturdy enough. Despite being 153 tons total weight (your calculation) it would not get anywhere near the seabed before it floated away. The seabed is at 5000ft down, have you worked out what the hydrostatic pressure would be at that depth? (around 2300psi…).
Alf I concur with your conclusion of the timeline between 20:00 Hrs. 4/20/10 & 21:50 Hrs. 4/21/10 & would further state in a court of law it would be difficult if not impossible to dispute. No offense to you, but that BP article is a piece of crap. These guys know exactly what happened & are covering it up by hididng extremely damning evidence between 1500 Hrs. & 2000 Hrs. There is no doubt red flags should have knocked the driller on his butt. However, knowing that there was a logging crew on board when the email of the plan came through then the crew was sent in on the 11:00 flight, the fact that the plan called for displacement of 3300’ below the stack & as you stated & was probably over displaced well into the riser before testing was done. The fact that the plan put no contingency for running a CBL in case the negative test failed, the fact that dependency on an annular that had been ripped up probably after a BOP test by stripping through with a buttload of hydraulic pressure on it instead of using the pipe rams to isolate the riser. All of these FACTS are starting to add up to extreme neglegence. I’ m pretty sure I have worked for the man mentioned by other posters on this board & as I recall I woldn’t trust him to figure hydrostatic pressure on a straight hole. What I would expect him to do, is get orders from above, download said orders, print out copies of said orders, & follow said orders to a TEE. Which it appears is exactly what occured on this day. Thanks for your outstanding input & please feel free to add any other comments you have.
I will not dispute your thoughts on the having to depend on the BOPs when good judgement should have ruled the day, but I am going to believe if they approched everything else the way they did the displacement, then they probably had pumped all the mud off the rig already & you know as well as I that’s crazy. I have begun to look at this situation as though they already knew they had fudged on their BOP tests & thats why they used the annular instead of the pipe rams to test with. I just hope to God the guy on 60 minutes wasn’t referring to the annular & that they stripped through the pipe rams. Either way, BP is guilty of gross neglegence in my book. I am praying for the success of the guys pumping the top kill tomorrow, but that does not excuse those who are guilty of killing 11 people & causing billions of dollars in damage & ruining other countless lives.
“I have a source which means I know someone who is in the xxxxxx xxxx of the camera submarine. He tells me a second hole has opened in the last hour and the first whole has increased in size by 25%. This is why there is activity on the camera and lots of debris.”
Cros talking to Alf, thanks for responding. Let me be clear in stating that this “soda straw” of proposed 5’ diameter pipe would be [U]open at both ends[/U] and so what I estimate to be 2,240 psi around 5,100’ below would be inconsequential except for the presumed near-linear expansion in volume and relative bouyancy of compressed gas bubbles as they rise up a cylinder pulling liquid along. The weight of the open pipe allows it to dangle by downward weight, to find it’s own scope angle as caused by the prevailing sea currents. In a 2 knot lateral current it may lay 10 degrees from vertical as in equilibrium, then the vessel could be positioned and the updraft of bubbles would eventually begin the work of the suction dredge concept “pump”. If the tube had sufficient angle to draw bubbles to one side, as in an intentional elbow. the excess gasses could be channeled up via a riser pipe. The mouth of the top could be designed many ways, and countless variations or enhancements come to mind.
I’ve already proposed placing something like high tension steel angle irons along it’s length to secure it like an I or H-beam with strength on the outside of a void, using tensile strength to aid in rigidity and elimination of stretching the top pipes with the weight dangling below. The displacement offset weight of the steel is minimal but is actually 13% of my estimated 306tons of culvert for an estuimated 40,000 pounds offset allowance, to be used for linear bracing as advised by engineers. There is no crush-stress and really no lateral stress for a pipe dangling like a chain unless significant current differences exist along it’s mile length.
Images below help show that I am not trying to invent the wheel, but to create and utilize a huge big wheel. (earlier idea) I got my specs for galvanized steel searching online and used that estimation to stress the very simplicity of concept as a model. Better materials may be available but I want to keep it simple for a sketch proposal and visualizations. Again thanks for understanding my frustration as to, why not? I’m not even ambitious, more Jimmy Buffet style, a parrot-head never a parrot. I realize I’m taking us down a rabbit hole, my discussion is too specific, this of yours is not detail-brainstorming thread. I will politely retreat, available for private discussions. I got my idea nagging me out, and I feel relieved in that alone. Thanks for an educated forum.
–[ATTACH=CONFIG]869[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]870[/ATTACH] (figures left) from the my video in reference above.
“I have a source which means I know someone who is in the xxxxxx xxxx of the camera submarine. He tells me a second hole has opened in the last hour and the first whole has increased in size by 25%. This is why there is activity on the camera and lots of debris.”
[QUOTE=Alf;33548]A pdf file should be attached[/QUOTE] I can only dispute/ add or change 2 things in this summation. I believe crew change was at 11:00 AM but they could have been short changing, in which case you know the driller would have finished his logs. the second is the 400 BBl. increase could have been a kick that had occured during their " Operation". This is an incredible summation. You would be an excellent expert witness.
It would be nice if they would tell us something we don’t already know, like the well is dead. How much does this guy make, cause I could definitely do his job. [QUOTE=alvis;33543]From http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article215908.ece
Also,
“BP operations boss Doug Suttles said that BP believes “the most likely” flow path is between two casing strings.”[/QUOTE]
FYI, I have been recording both the CNN and BP feeds since about 30+ minutes after my previous post. If I can find some place to upload all of the footage I will do so, if not, feel free to message me for any requests of footage which may be of help.
So…just watched Tony Hayward’s interview on CNN. Sounds like there was trouble with the diagnostics last night and they will continue this AM and then, later today, he will make the final decision on whether to go ahead with the Top Kill. Anybody know what kind of problems they ran into?
I want eveyone to listen & listen good. If they decide not to pump that job today, then it means only one thing, that well is flowing much more than 40,000 Bbls./ day & they know they can’t get enough rate through their hoses & don’t have enough horse power to get the rate they need. That would make the analysis of the professor from Purdue correct. There is nothing else to analize. Everything else such as function testing of the valves, etc. should have been done already.[QUOTE=KoKoMo;33577]So…just watched Tony Hayward’s interview on CNN. Sounds like there was trouble with the diagnostics last night and they will continue this AM and then, later today, he will make the final decision on whether to go ahead with the Top Kill. Anybody know what kind of problems they ran into?[/QUOTE]