Reconstruction of hull, Battleship BISMARCK, 1/100 scale

[109]

Hi Anatoly,

sorry, but I have to correct you: the cooling water outlets were placed in the hull bottom. I added a sketch for the situation with the ship steaming headaway.

[109]

And for reverse:

[Rafael]

Hi guys,

I was looking at Bernd's pictures and explanations. I totally agree with him. Front opening works in forward motion and rear one in backwards. Both openings should be connected to the condenser but a flap should prevent the water to escape prom one opening to the other while the ship is moving in one or other direction. The shield between the openings create a low pressure area in the downstream opening and force the water to enter in the other, facilitating in this way the work of the water pumps (net suction head more positive on the pumps).

Locating the cooling water outlet in the flat bottom the water jet keeps the mud and debris away from the cooling water system, this is very important in the relative shalow waters in the Elbe river for example. A feature design that was not considered in the Prinz Eugen. In that ship the cooling water intakes and outlet were located in the bottom and not in the side of the ship as many friends believe.

Kind regards.

Rafael

[109]

Hi Rafael,

thanks for your response. Do you have drawings of PE�s in- and outlets, please?

Good night,

Bernd.

[Rafael]

Hi,

I have some drawings of the Prinz Eugen but they do not show the water intakes and outlets clearly. In one book I have it shows a drawing of the top tank with some indications but not clear enough, let me see tomorrow I will look for the info and post it if I can.

Good night.

Rafael

[Mickosh3]

Hi Bernd!

Let me argue with you a little bit.

As I find in a description, the each Bismarck's "turbinemodul" had two condensors: the primary condensor and secondary (main) one. They were two different parts of the cooling system. And my opinion is: the bottom outlets are for primary condrnsors only, but "rear" side outlets - for main condensors.

Also there is a strange argument against your waterflow diagrams: in real, the ship like Bismarck never moves backward itself ! The bacward turbines were used mostly for braking - but the ship still moves forward! So, there is no need in the hude rear inlet openings for backward waterflow.

And then: the power of backwarg turbines was 24 t.h.f (total), but forward turbines were 150 t. h. f. .. Really, I don't see a reason in the hude opening!

But if you have a detailed draving of the Bismarck's machinery- please, post the fragment of it.

With best regards,
Anatoly

[109]

Here is a sketch as you requested.

HTH,

Bernd.

[Guest]

Hi, Bernd,
Drawings are drawings, and I have to agree with you.
It is strange for me: I see the rear opening like a ejector pump- but I have nothing to say against the document.

With best regards -
Anatoly

[109]

Hi Anatoly,

thanks for your contributions!

We have a lot more to discuss in the coming years ...

[jcmackay]

Bernd,

Very interesting and unique discussion of the cooling water inlets; you've clearly amassed an impressive amount of research on the ship! IMHO though, the design of the inlets for making sternway on the ship is an example of over-engineering by the Bismarck's builders. Although answering astern bells is an important capability for any ship, the design suggests that the builders envisioned prolonged motion of the ship astern at more than just a couple of knots, which does not seem justified, especially with a ship so large. It would be interesting to know what they were thinking...

Keep up the great work!

John

[109]

Hi John,

most ships are not designed to steam backwards for a long period of time, but sufficient cooling has to be guaranteed of course. Reverse speeds would have been slow (3 to 4 knts?) and while breaking the rear inlets would be still leeward of the water flow alongside the hull. So the overall configuration of the inlets has to fulfill lots of different requirements. Some questions remain open.

Have a nice sunday,

Bernd.

[DrPR]

This is an interesting discussion. I have looked at engineering plans for a number of ships, including condenser inlets and outlets - these are the major water intakes and exhausts. By cooling the steam exhaust from the turbines and causing it to condense the pressure drop across the turbines is increased greatly, improving efficiency. For this to work a large volume of water is needed to carry away heat from the condensing steam.

On the ship I am modeling (a U.S. Cleveland class) the intakes and exhausts are all on the bottom, with a fairly short in/out flow through. These ships operated out of fairly deep water ports, and mostly on the open ocean. With the two ocean Navy ships rarely passed through shallow passages line the Panama Canal, and the water depth in the Panama is controlled.

The design Bernd is modeling requires longer plumbing with the side inlets and bottom exhausts. In addition, the side intakes form a violation of double hull torpedo protection - a torpedo hit directly into one of these openings would have been disastrous. So why did they use this configuration?

I don't know for sure, but I wonder if it was because the German ships had to navigate the Kiel Canal frequently? Like all canals, it is only as deep as necessary, and the larger capital ships must have had very little bottom clearance. Maybe they even had to consider tides (anyone know for sure?) before passing through the canal. Bottom intakes would have posed a problem of dredging muck through the condensers, where the side intakes would have sucked up much less muck.

Has anyone run across the rationale behind the side intake design?

Phil

[bismarck builder]

hi
i would love to see photos of the real thing
gary

[109]

Hi,

the film showing Bismarck�s launch shows details of the sea boxes. Look for it on youtube!

Bye!

[Richard D]

Hi all
I saw some people are looking for me, so thought I would drop a message I am talking about the post on pg 14 of this topic ,I am the one who did a 3d model of Bismarck
Hello Rafeal if you are there!!

Richard D
rsdigitalstudio@bigpond.com

[109]

Hi Richard,

welcome here. Please feel free to post screenshots or renderings of your Bismarck.

Bye,

Bernd.

[109]

Hi,

I recently came across a ruler-template with mm-increments (increments of inches are also available) for applying precise markings on your subjects from Incra Rules. It really is a great little tool and makes scoring of markings precise and reliable. I am using it for marking the frame numbers on the main deck with a very fine 0,1 mm Edding 1800.

Bye,

CIX.

[Guest]

Hello 109,

Just stumbled across your thread and wanted to say that your work is fantastic.

I'm very familiar with where you live, i went to Trade School in Phorzheim in the late 80's and early 90's.

Can't wait to see more of your build, keep the pictures coming

Helge

[Big Guns]

Hello 109,
Just ran across your thread and wanted to say that your work is fantastic, I love the attention to detail.
I was amazed to see you live in Vaihingen an der Enz...I'm very familiar with that area as I went to Trade School in Pforzheim in the late 80's and early 90's and My Brother in Law retired from Daimler just a few years ago.
I love your progress and keep the pictures coming.

Helge

[109]

Hi Helge,

small world ... my wife is from the region of Brackenheim/G�glingen. Nice area here and there are some very good wineries around!

Are you working on a 23nd scale Arizona?

Bye!