Peak Tank Rooms on Orlop and Tanktop Decks

B

Bill Sauder

Member
Mark:

I am told about 500 times each day that I must "celebrate the diversity and traditions" of others.

Now it's my turn to celebrate my centuries-old tradition. Ships are she.

Bill Sauder
 
E

Erik Wood

Member
Sure does. I have a mind to go and tell Lloyd that it needs to get on a ship and hopefully the ship will sink. But I wouldn't wish that on a ship, ships are to proud for that, besided I
know that SHE wouldn't like Lloyd either.

Erik
 
M

Mark Baber

Staff member
Moderator
Member
There are no "its" on Great Ships, BTW.
 
C

Colleen Collier

Member
>>>I am told about 500 times each day that I must "celebrate the diversity and traditions" of others.
Now it's my turn to celebrate my centuries-old tradition. Ships are she.<<<<<

Since no women have commented here, I WILL....

Perfect, Bill! I will second the other comment you made on Wednesday, 17 July, 2002 - 6:26 pm too!

Heaven help if ~I~ were a tour guide on QM today. Guess I would be fired for noncompliance. Ships have earned the title "SHE". (Hey did I just insult myself here?)
Blush

Colleen
 
Tracy Smith

Tracy Smith

Member
It doesn't matter to me one way or the other whether ships are called she or it....or even he! People should use whatever they feel most comfortable with.

I guess most other languages have it easier because all nouns are "gendered", even inanimate objects. For instance, German has der, die, and das; masculine, feminine, and neuter. "Pencil", Der Bleistift, is masculine, "Pen", Die Feder, is feminine, but Das Madchen (young girl) is neuter! Go figure.

Phil.....I had to reword one of my sentences because it wouldn't allow me to use the verb "is" after the word "pen"......sigh.
 
N

Noel F. Jones

Member
Regarding tankage management:

I was referring to general cargo practice rather than large passenger vessels; and by the way I should have said 'fresh water' rather than 'drinking water'. Actual potable (drinking) water costs more and is better placed in the double bottom tanks. There was/is a possibility of contamination in the peaks from weeping rivets started by panting forward and propeller vibration aft.

Non-potable fresh is shipped for boiler feed water and cooling jackets and for general hotel services and sculleries. Potable is piped to health-sensitive outlets such as food prep., bar faucets and service pantries. If supplies were running low sanitizing chemical, usually calcium hypochorite, was routinely carried for converting non-potable to potable. If you are going to ship water as ballast it makes sense to press up your tankage with fresh if available. It goes in the double bottom as well and can usually be transferred between all. The practice varies from company to company, ship to ship – and chief officer to chief officer!

Sanitary water is exclusively salt (unless one is out of drydock or a prolongued spell in port). Seawater was supplied to bathrooms in the older passenger ships and required a special seawater soap – I've never seen it myself. Swimming pools were filled on passage. I've never know 'paid for' fresh water to be used in swimming pools but maybe some cruise ships do it nowadays. They'd need dedicated filtration/sanitization plant.

The ability to quickly longitudinally trim ship can be critical in some operating conditions such as river steaming. Steaming 'by the head' can obviate running flat aground and gives you a second chance.


On intentional 'hogging':– the peak tanks were only supplemental in this, the greater effect being achieved by cargo deadweight. The practice was not illegal per se, the requisite load line criteria being satisfied and (unlike Erik Wood's examples) it did not subtend actual unseaworthiness. The occasion I referred to involved a most prestigious cargo liner company whose ships were in any case built to superior scantlings. And I hasten to add they were as concerned to accommodate important shippers as to garner more freight. Space was at a premium and shippers wanted 'end of month' bills of lading – all to do with bank interest.

I'm rambling again!

To return to the Olympic/Titanic, the peaks may well have been isolated from the fresh water circulating/abstraction system; I have no information. They seem to transcend the tank tops and, as others have pointed out, there were fresh water wing tanks in way of the generator room. But the tank tops were precisely what the name indicates. There was a system of tankage below the plating which does not show up on the general arrangement plan, but all that frame space was not wasted. Gas oil and some 'luboil' also had to be accommodated and, in the case of the Olympic after conversion, much boiler oil.

To my knowledge, there were no on-board distillation or R/O plants in those days and all fresh water had to be shipped prior to sailing.

By the way, what's ships' gender got to do with tankage?

Noel
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
If you check the Shipbulder, you'll find that the Olympics certainly did have water distillation capability. An absolute nesseccity for the large liners given the hotel demands and the requirements of the steam plant. If you check page 63 of John Maxtone-Graham's reprint, you'll find the plant described as "The latest Quiggan's type, and have been supplied by the Liverpool Engineering and Condenser Co." The Olympic class vessels had three of them with a capacity of 60 tons per day each.

I have another history text on the history of steam propulsion and I'll have to dig it out when I have the time, but it indicates that evaporators had been around since the 19th Century.
 
E

Erik Wood

Member
Mr. Jones

Sanitary water is exclusively salt (unless one is out of drydock or a prolongued spell in port). Seawater was supplied to bathrooms in the older passenger ships and required a special seawater soap – I've never seen it myself. Swimming pools were filled on passage. I've never know 'paid for' fresh water to be used in swimming pools but maybe some cruise ships do it nowadays. They'd need dedicated filtration/sanitization plant.

Please site youre sources on this. I have experience to the contrary, but then again I have trouble remembering my name.

On intentional 'hogging':– the peak tanks were only supplemental in this, the greater effect being achieved by cargo deadweight. The practice was not illegal per se, the requisite load line criteria being satisfied and (unlike Erik Wood's examples) it did not subtend actual unseaworthiness.

Under 46 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) put out by the United States Coast Guard, ships who practice intentional hogging are "in violation of there orginal load line certificate" and "any attempt to manipulate the reading of draft markings, or dead cargo weight by tonnage, pounds or any other weight measurement will result in immediate suspension of clearance to sail.."

Now those quotations are off the top of my head. I had questions referencing this on my recent Surveyor and Incident Investigator Cerfitication test. Those where my answers. Now, granted that isn't International Law and every country does it differently. Plus, that is my understanding of the law, it can be interpreted differently by different people.

All that being said, it is still common practice and rarely discovered by the Coast Guard when they check.

Erik
 
N

Noel F. Jones

Member
Distillation plant:

"To my knowledge, there were no on-board distillation or R/O plants in those days and all fresh water had to be shipped prior to sailing."

Now how can I circumlocute my way out of this one? I could say that my comment was an injudicious afterthought, written on the wing immediately prior to posting. So what did I have in mind when I wrote it?

Anent the five vessels built for the Indian Troop Service 1865-1895, "as was the practice at that time, seawater was used for boiler feed in all five vessels. Drinking water was distilled from the main boilers to satisfy the heavy demand when troops were carried. This meant a constant rate of change in the boilers. A beneficial result of this was that a chemical equilibrium was generated, precipitating scaling sufficient to inhibit corrosion of the metal surfaces but not to an extent as would impede the transmission of heat from the furnaces. Fresh water feed was first tried in the "Jumna" during the 1874-75 trooping season."

And I wrote that myself.

It gets worse. There is an example of distillation apparatus to be seen on Nelson's HMS Victory; a copper still driven from the galley fires, the distillate presumably used primarily for cooking. This pushes things back to about 1755 and I don't doubt there are earlier examples.

As one who perceives a duty not to misinform, I can do no other than retract, revoke and abnegate my earlier statement and offer my apologies.

On the matter of sanitary water, baths and swimpools; I was really fishing for more info. from contributors. If you were to tell me that all hotel services, including swimpools, can now be supplied with potable water I wouldn't be surprised. As for seawater soap - maybe some old shipchandlers' advertising may throw up something. I believe it was in use in the long haul far eastern/Australian passenger vessels.

On the matter of MCT and the peak tanks; Mike Standart asks: "What I'm wondering however is the source for the following comment that Noel made; ">>Fore- and afterpeak tanks are normally used as drinking water reservoirs. Being at the extremities of the ship they also exert a significant MCT (moment to change trim) and can therefore be used to quickly trim ship.<<"

I'm not sure what case I am to answer. I can only say that alternative terms for these tanks are 'trimming' and 'ballast' (in which trimming is implicit); and that their deployment invokes a basic principle of physics - a 'free-free' version of the terrestrial steelyard. But you knew that already.

On the matter of intentional hogging: Erik Wood reassures us that the practice is now proscribed under US law and I'm sure elsewhere (SOLAS anybody?), but difficult nevertheless to enforce. Presumably this could only be done in the past by comparing the midship draft with that at the extremities but there are only centimetres in it and this can be difficult especially with a torch at night, even in enclosed dock systems if there is a lop on the water. As for getting a case up (when time is both money and pressing) this might mean the inspectorate trying to reconcile a general cargo stowage plan with its concomitant stowage factors along the vessel's length. Difficult.

Can modern draft-measuring sensors return hog and sag? And would not intentionally hogging a modern container vessel necessitate entering the box cycling software so as to disable an 'even strain' safety attribute?

Noel
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
>>On the matter of sanitary water, baths and swimpools; I was really fishing for more info. from contributors. <<

Ah, well if thats the case, simply ask the question. somebody here either knows the answer ot where to find it.

In the case of steam plants at sea and their auxilaries such as evaporator plants, you might want to buy "Steam at Sea: Two Centuries of Steam-Powered Ships" by Dr. Denis Griffiths. It can be had at Amazon.com at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0851776663/qid=1027225538/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-5139240-3140102 for $43.00. A bit pricy, but worth it.

Regarding scaling of boilers with sea salt, have to point out that steam engineers were definately of the opinion conterary to yours. Shutting down the plant every so often to chip it away was brutally hard work, labour intensive and a waste of time. The corrosive effects of salt water at very high temperatures were far from welcome as well. Hence the motivation to find ways to provide fresh water to the plant.
 
Dave Gittins

Dave Gittins

Member
Salt water soap is readily available from yacht chandlers. $2-50 Aus per cake.

I have a feeling that water distillation plant was compulsory on liners in 1912. Certainly Titanic's capacity was noted when she was cleared for the voyage. I'll dig for the rules.
 
Dave Gittins

Dave Gittins

Member
Here's the dinkum oil on water distilling.

In simple terms, emigrant ships, such as Titanic had three options.

1. Carry a prescribed amount of water in dedicated tanks that were not part of a double bottom. Standards were laid down for construction, filtration, etc.

2. Carry half the prescribed amount in similar tanks, plus a distillation plant able to produce one gallon of water every twenty-four hours for each person on board. Again, standards were set, including approved manufacturers and capable operators. There was even a prescribed list of tools, among them a 14" flat b******. (For those who know what that is).

3. Water could be carried in the double bottom under prescribed rules, such as dividing it between several tanks. In that case, a distillation plant capable of producing the ship's prescribed daily requirement had to be carried. That was the system on Titanic and her plant could produce 14,000 gallons per day, or 62.5 tons.

(All units are Imperial)
 
Top