1,000 Boats To Push Flood Waters From Chao Phraya River

[MaxYakov]

So the Ministry would have us believe that these boats moved an extra 250-450 Cu M per SECOND down the river and out to sea? Or perhaps it was that they started Operation Crutch It at Peak High Tide, and the subsequent falling in water levels was due to the tide going out. It just beggars belief that the Government feed this garbage to it's people.

450 Cu M per second is apparently "a relatively small amount"......

In an attempt to speed the flow through waterways towards the Gulf of Thailand, authorities organised around a thousand boats to line up with engines running on the Chao Phraya, Bang Pa Kong and Tha Chin rivers.

Yingluck, speaking from the banks of the Chao Phraya in Nonthaburi province, north of Bangkok, said the boats' propellers would move only a relatively small amount of water but that the measure was still "worthwhile and efficient".

AFP

http://www.terradail...menace_999.html

You're trying to correlate the quantity GentlemanJim quoted with a quantity that Yingluck allegedly stated? Good Luck with that!

Considering Yingluck's alleged statement solely, begs the questions of what 'only a relatively small amount' was and what is considered 'worthwhile and efficient', doesn't it?

I'd say ' near zero' and 'not a chance - except, politically'.

Edited October 17, 2011 by MaxYakov

[cloudhopper]

Flood center: boats push 5-10% of flood runoff out to sea succeeded;Nakhon Sawan should see water recede in 7 days but months for Ayutthaya /TAN_Network

Our cure for the common cold worked exactly as designed; symptoms will begin to disappear between one week and two months from now.

[hyperdimension]

His degree is in forestry.

The official Curriculum Vitae Dr. Plodprasop Suraswadi on the Ministry of Science and Technology web site shows his education as follows:

Education

1968 B.Sc. Fisheries, Kasetsart University, Thailand

1970 M.Sc. Fisheries Management, Oregon State University, U.S.A.

1976 Ph.D. Ecology, University of Manitoba, Canada

1990 National Defence College

He even has "honorary" Ph.D.s:

Honorary Credential

1991 Ph.D. Fishery Technology, Mae Jo University , Thailand

1992 Ph.D. Fisheries , Kasetsart University

I wonder if the means by which he obtained such honorary degrees has anything to do with him being Council member of both Kasetsart University and Mea Jo University.

His Curriculum Vitae has no mention of his good work as project director of the Chiang Mai Night Safari (Come to our zoo... then eat the animals!), nor his current position in the Cabinet of Pheu Thai as Minister of Science and Technology.

Edited October 17, 2011 by hyperdimension

[BuckarooBanzai]

"I suspect that the key is to keep the speed of the boats only slightly higher than the existing flow of water in the river. This way the effective Reynolds Number will be low enough so the "flow" of the boats relative to the river will be laminar (governed by friction) instead of turbulent (producing mixing, agitation, and wakes). The Reynolds Number should vary directly with the relative speed and inversely with the "channel" width between adjacent boats in a complex relationship. The length of the boat, defining the effective channel length, also plays a role".

Step Dads a Physicist with a PhD from Stanford and this was his opinion. (Not in fluid dynamics)".I believe that any experienced fluid dynamicist should be able to work out an approximate solution based on flow in an open channel". He added. So why was this not done before they started this endeavour?

Always ask the smart dudes!

I believe that if you ask him he is talking about the passage of the boat through water. Now ask him about the energy output by the prop. The prop wash is a turbulent flow and is the basic reason this whole hair brained idea does not work to begin with.

[BuckarooBanzai]

His degree is in forestry.

The official Curriculum Vitae Dr. Plodprasop Suraswadi on the Ministry of Science and Technology web site shows his education as follows:

Education

1968 B.Sc. Fisheries, Kasetsart University, Thailand

1970 M.Sc. Fisheries Management, Oregon State University, U.S.A.

1976 Ph.D. Ecology, University of Manitoba, Canada

1990 National Defence College

He even has "honorary" Ph.D.s:

Honorary Credential

1991 Ph.D. Fishery Technology, Mae Jo University , Thailand

1992 Ph.D. Fisheries , Kasetsart University

I wonder if the means by which he obtained such honorary degrees has anything to do with him being Council member of both Kasetsart University and Mea Jo University.

His Curriculum Vitae has no mention of his good work as project director of the Chiang Mai Night Safari (Come to our zoo... then eat the animals!), nor his current position in the Cabinet of Pheu Thai as Minister of Science and Technology.

How many cub scout merit badges is this equivalent to?

[MaxYakov]

His degree is in forestry.

The official Curriculum Vitae Dr. Plodprasop Suraswadi on the Ministry of Science and Technology web site shows his education as follows:

Education

1968 B.Sc. Fisheries, Kasetsart University, Thailand

1970 M.Sc. Fisheries Management, Oregon State University, U.S.A.

1976 Ph.D. Ecology, University of Manitoba, Canada

1990 National Defence College

He even has "honorary" Ph.D.s:

Honorary Credential

1991 Ph.D. Fishery Technology, Mae Jo University , Thailand

1992 Ph.D. Fisheries , Kasetsart University

I wonder if the means by which he obtained such honorary degrees has anything to do with him being Council member of both Kasetsart University and Mea Jo University.

His Curriculum Vitae has no mention of his good work as project director of the Chiang Mai Night Safari (Come to our zoo... then eat the animals!), nor his current position in the Cabinet of Pheu Thai as Minister of Science and Technology.

Thanks. Jeesh! I took Bucholtz's 'forestry degree' factoid without confirming it.

Do you think there's an off chance he's been promoted to his Peter Principle level of incompetence by now?

[hyperdimension]

How many cub scout merit badges is this equivalent to?

I think that picture is just a Photoshop job and cannot be relied upon, as his mole above his lip cannot be seen in it, and therefore takes away credibility (whatever there was) from his entire Curriculum Vitae.

[wintermute]

His Curriculum Vitae has no mention of his good work as project director of the Chiang Mai Night Safari (Come to our zoo... then eat the animals!), nor his current position in the Cabinet of Pheu Thai as Minister of Science and Technology.

How many cub scout merit badges is this equivalent to?

The worth is equivalent to those plastic badges you can get from a cracker jack box.

[steveromagnino]

anyone who is foolish enough to think that this attempt has had a meaningful impact on the flood, please provide actual evidence in the form of a scientific proof or measurement data.

it's obvious that the PM is out of her depth (BOOM BOOM!) on this matter. She only says that it has had an effect to make her biggest supporters happy, and as is usually the case, they will lap up anything she says; she could say she kindly moved the moon using satellites to aid the tides, and they would believe it.

A more objective person would question the science behind it. Especially one who has studied physics or has any familiarity with the sea and with boats.

[MaxYakov]

His degree is in forestry.

The official Curriculum Vitae Dr. Plodprasop Suraswadi on the Ministry of Science and Technology web site shows his education as follows:

< snipped impressive education history, and equally-impressive portrait - so sorry >

How many cub scout merit badges is this equivalent to?

Errrr. Would you take Junior Woodchucks badge equivalency instead?

[saintofsilence]

Bring These Guys In

MYTHBUSTERS

http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/mythbusters/

[MaxYakov]

anyone who is foolish enough to think that this attempt has had a meaningful impact on the flood, please provide actual evidence in the form of a scientific proof or measurement data.

it's obvious that the PM is out of her depth (BOOM BOOM!) on this matter. She only says that it has had an effect to make her biggest supporters happy, and as is usually the case, they will lap up anything she says; she could say she kindly moved the moon using satellites to aid the tides, and they would believe it.

A more objective person would question the science behind it. Especially one who has studied physics or has any familiarity with the sea and with boats.

I'm sure Johnny Depp is objectively scrutinizing the science of this as we write.

Edited October 17, 2011 by MaxYakov

[Who, me ?]

5 to 10% ? Why not 6% ? Why not 11% ?

And how exactly did they measure that? What kind of equipment did they install? Where ?

Not only they make fools of themselves with such a crazy stupid idea, not only they insult people intelligence by trying to make them believe their bullsh8t, but now they come back with quantified results,...... They are morons, at best... Irresponsible, inefficient, ignorant,....

[hyperdimension]

Do you think there's an off chance he's been promoted to his Peter Principle level of incompetence by now?

He may have had already reached it previously.

The wikipedia page of the Peter Principle states:

employees tend to be promoted until they reach a position at which they cannot work competently

But it seems that in Thailand, particularly in government positions, once they reach a level of incompetence, they then move from one position to another, continuing to be incompetent in each. This would be partially due to the fact that people are often put into positions not based on qualification but family / social / business connections.

Also, some are just incompetent from the start.

[Insight]

anyone who is foolish enough to think that this attempt has had a meaningful impact on the flood, please provide actual evidence in the form of a scientific proof or measurement data.

it's obvious that the PM is out of her depth (BOOM BOOM!) on this matter. She only says that it has had an effect to make her biggest supporters happy, and as is usually the case, they will lap up anything she says; she could say she kindly moved the moon using satellites to aid the tides, and they would believe it.

A more objective person would question the science behind it. Especially one who has studied physics or has any familiarity with the sea and with boats.

Not sure if it's a colossal attempt at face-saving, but there where reports going around yesterday that this unique approach to remedy the flood problem came from somewhere quite high up top. Dunno if these claims will ever be clarified or rejected though....

[webfact]

Plodprasob claims operation to speed up water flow successful

The Nation

Science Minister Plodprasob Surasswadee claimed Monday that the operation to have over 1,000 boast speed up water flow on rivers to the sea became successful.

But Plodprasob was quick to add that the operation would need 75,000 more boats to increase its efficiency.

He said owners of boat could join the operations at deltas of major rivers.

The Sunday operation was joined by 1,149 boats. The science minister said it was successful up to a point but he did not elaborate.

-- The Nation 2011-10-17

[saintofsilence]

"But Plodprasob was quick to add that the operation would need 75,000 more boats to increase its efficiency."

They were only 73851 short

[orchidlady]

Plodprasob claims operation to speed up water flow successful

The Nation

Science Minister Plodprasob Surasswadee claimed Monday that the operation to have over 1,000 boast speed up water flow on rivers to the sea became successful.

But Plodprasob was quick to add that the operation would need 75,000 more boats to increase its efficiency.

He said owners of boat could join the operations at deltas of major rivers.

The Sunday operation was joined by 1,149 boats. The science minister said it was successful up to a point but he did not elaborate.

-- The Nation 2011-10-17

wouldn't 75, 000 boats possibly raise the water level just by their total weight on the water?

[Who, me ?]

Plodprasob claims operation to speed up water flow successful

The Nation

Science Minister Plodprasob Surasswadee claimed Monday that the operation to have over 1,000 boast speed up water flow on rivers to the sea became successful.

But Plodprasob was quick to add that the operation would need 75,000 more boats to increase its efficiency.

He said owners of boat could join the operations at deltas of major rivers.

The Sunday operation was joined by 1,149 boats. The science minister said it was successful up to a point but he did not elaborate.

-- The Nation 2011-10-17

wait a minute....with 1,000 boats they increased the flow by 5 to 10% of the water out.

So, if they use 75,000 boats they will push so much water, that they will have to import some to fill the river bed.

The muppet show is still on......No shame at all, ....

[hyperdimension]

His Curriculum Vitae has no mention of his good work as project director of the Chiang Mai Night Safari (Come to our zoo... then eat the animals!), nor his current position in the Cabinet of Pheu Thai as Minister of Science and Technology.

Actually I've had a look at the Thai version of his Curriculum Vitae and it has more detail, including him being the founder of the Chiang Mai Night Safari and how successful it has been (Google translation):

is the founder of Chiang Mai Night Safari. Chiang Mai. This is Thailand's first Night Safari. And a third of the world, from Singapore and Guangzhou. A source of tourists, both Thai and foreign famous.

Here is a list of his "decorations" (Google translation):

7. Decorations.

2533 Knight of the Crown.

2534 Medal Class 3 equipment.

2536 Secondary Military Academy.

2538 Most Exalted Order of the White Elephant King Live.

There is no mention though of Thaksin or any of the Shinawatras' political parties in his Curriculum Vitae, possibly in an attempt to portay himself as politically neutral or above partisan politics, even though he has been strongly allied with Thaksin and his parties for much of his political career. He even filed, with Thaksin, a lese majeste suit aganst Sondhi in 2006: Thaksin, Plodprasop file lese majeste suits against Sondhi.

Edited October 17, 2011 by hyperdimension

[Rinrada]

Better to have lined up all of Thai Airways jumbo jets on the pier at Samut Prakan and turned their engines on to full power at the same time (remembering to hold down the aircraft of course with bits of string)

That would have forced all the water in the Bangkok basin all the way to Australia and solved any shortage down there.

(my idea for next year)

err trouble is that when they switch off the engines..assuming still in position ...the water would rush back...ermmmm

Well wot about free buckets.......?

[FOODLOVER]

"I suspect that the key is to keep the speed of the boats only slightly higher than the existing flow of water in the river. This way the effective Reynolds Number will be low enough so the "flow" of the boats relative to the river will be laminar (governed by friction) instead of turbulent (producing mixing, agitation, and wakes). The Reynolds Number should vary directly with the relative speed and inversely with the "channel" width between adjacent boats in a complex relationship. The length of the boat, defining the effective channel length, also plays a role".

Step Dads a Physicist with a PhD from Stanford and this was his opinion. (Not in fluid dynamics)".I believe that any experienced fluid dynamicist should be able to work out an approximate solution based on flow in an open channel". He added. So why was this not done before they started this endeavour?

Always ask the smart dudes!

I believe that if you ask him he is talking about the passage of the boat through water. Now ask him about the energy output by the prop. The prop wash is a turbulent flow and is the basic reason this whole hair brained idea does not work to begin with.

Will do! Late in Palo Alto now. I am still trying to comprehend the 2 pints of water into a 1 pint glass. Sawdust? Would the sawdust not expand upward there fore the glass would not be able to contain the contents?i.e overflow

As a professional chef I can see how it is possible. A souffle has the same principle using the flour but rises from the top so it would not be technically contained. The flour absorbs the water particles thus expanding and with the introduction of air through the whipping of the whites in the albumin it creates the rise. But is still not contained in the souffle dish.Is there a youtube link that can show this?

[serenitynow]

Flood center: boats push 5-10% of flood runoff out to sea succeeded;Nakhon Sawan should see water recede in 7 days but months for Ayutthaya /TAN_Network

Or maybe it was gravity.

[BabySun]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

Oh, it is about physics.

Here's some science for you, Newton's First: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

In the last video I saw the boats in mid river keeping position against the river flow with their engines, not anchored to a bridge or anything else.

If an object being propelled through a medium, say... I don't know, river water, stays in the same position it is because the thrust equals the drag, that is the push from the propeller in one direction equals the push from the water in the other. In short, boat in river, push = X, drag = X therefore the net result is ZERO energy added to the river, whatever water those boats are pushing back is canceled out by the water the hulls are slowing down.

I wonder if the Science Minister even heard about Newton.

You have heard,but you do not understand it.You dont have a grasp of it.

You are right, I have no idea what you are talking about.

A;eG

It starts to hurt your head when you continue to bang it on the wall, we need to stop or we will end up like the more mentally challenged on here, who seem to think that the boats actually made a change to the river. I never cease to be amazed that in the effort of trying to prove they are clever, people on here will argue until they are blue in the face that they are right. The fact is that the neanderthals can say what they want about their kindergarten understanding of Newtons laws (it is an achievement at least that they have heard of Newton), the fact is if we cannot measure the difference because it is so minute and small then for all intents and purposes, with regards to flood relief the effect is zero. If the pedants cannot understand that then they belong in the back patting club for the Science Minister. The waste of resources in this case is simply staggering. If the neanderthals continue to fight back AleG, we better just leave them as they will drag us down to their level of intellect in the end.

By the way @ BabySun

Can you explain what you mean in your one liner, "you have heard but you do not understand. You don't have a grasp". Please enlighten us to the thought processes that led you to make that statement. Please describe exactly how the laws of Newton in this case are going to be applied, considering ALL the variables, that will show that the river water could be measurably speeded up in outflow at the mouth of the river.

@jetsetBkk@GentlemanJim@AleG

Here is error of "AleG" thinking: He says,that ZERO energy is added to the river(the last line is about ScienceMinister,the line before - this one I am referring to).

However to make the push - boat propeller props water with much higher velocity then velocity of boat itself.

This water is losing contact with boat moment after it leaves propeller but it retains the energy and it travels submerged in main current mixing with it and

transfering its energy into main current and its initial vector is - downstream!Here I've got you AleG!

Do not tell me that energy from boat propeller is dispersed/converted into thermal energy.Do Sir Newton a favoure and make scientific experiment in your kitchen:

try to boil some water in your juice blender!no matter how long you try - you will fail.Are you convinced?

Anchored boats could run engines full throttle producing faster torrent remaining still.

But all this doesnt matter because this thread is about - politics!no kidding..

Edited October 17, 2011 by BabySun

[animatic]

anyone who is foolish enough to think that this attempt has had a meaningful impact on the flood, please provide actual evidence in the form of a scientific proof or measurement data.

it's obvious that the PM is out of her depth (BOOM BOOM!) on this matter. She only says that it has had an effect to make her biggest supporters happy, and as is usually the case, they will lap up anything she says; she could say she kindly moved the moon using satellites to aid the tides, and they would believe it.

A more objective person would question the science behind it. Especially one who has studied physics or has any familiarity with the sea and with boats.

Not sure if it's a colossal attempt at face-saving, but there where reports going around yesterday that this unique approach to remedy the flood problem came from somewhere quite high up top. Dunno if these claims will ever be clarified or rejected though....

Well in Thailand the appearance of 'doing something' works well most of the time. This is NOT one of those times of course.

Edited October 17, 2011 by animatic

[JetsetBkk]

The moored hulls are obstructing the flow and actually causing water upstream to pile up higher. A river is not a pipe and any water accelerated by the props will pile up immediately downstream and then outward in all directions including back upstream. The net effect is actually negative and a complete waste of energy, machinery and manpower.

The hulls obstructing the water flow at the surface is a good point.

The water flowing back upstream causing a net effect that is negative is very silly.

[ResX]

Ok. Let's talk about a proven scientific fundamental to answer this question. " Can we increase river flow by putting 1000boats which their engines on and they are held standstill against the incoming flow?", My short, straightly to the theoretical point of view answer is, "yes". Let's see how it should work.

When you navigate your boat under the normal circumstance, your boat moves. The water may or may not move. If you hold your boat standstill with its engine is on and its propeller engaged, then your boat will not move. The water does, but in opposite direction. If the mass of your boat is 1000kg and it can move 10m/s, then from conservation of momentum, if you hold the boat stationary, the same energy can move 1000kg of water at the speed of 10m/s too.

If you can force river flow to move faster by 10m/s at any cross sectional area, the water will lose its potential energy but it gains additional kinetic energy. What does it means? The water level at that cross sectional area will go down. It is impossible for the water at that cross sectional area to retain its level as if it travel 10m/s slower. Otherwise energy is created out of nothing. You know that it can't be true. At the given elevation of water level and the given velocity the water has a specific amount of energy. It cannot be created nor destroyed. If you put a dam you are converting the energy to 100% potential. Waterfall converts energy to 100% kinetic. For river flow, at any cross sectional area it has these two forms of energies namely potential and kinetic.

As the water level at that cross sectional area goes down it creates additional pressure gradient between "the distance of influence" upstream to the cross sectional area of interest. I give you a numerical example. Normal condition: Flood level 5 km upstream = 10m above sea level and at that cross sectional area of interest is 7m above sea level. Pressure gradient = 3m. Modified water speed condition: Water level goes down by 2m to 5m above sea level. New gradient =5m. What do you expect about the speed of water when you increase pressure gradient between these two points? The water will move faster, eventually.

Many of us in this thread question about practicability issue rather than the fundamental scientific methodology. I don't want to comment about this issue since I don't know how it was done. In order to make thing works you have to be right for both of these :(1) Conceptual and (2) Procedure. I'm just explain the concept. Not the procedure.

Note: "The distance of influence" is quite tricky to explain. Let me put this way. As long as the water at any point upstream (Point to the point of modified river speed (says Point A) can receive "feedback" about the change in water level at Point A then Point B falls under "the distance of influence". This completely rules out the point upstream to the first waterfall to be included under "the distance of influence". If you have pressurized tunnel the water at entrance of the tunnel will always get the feedback about the water level at the exit. That is what the flow becomes zero when the exit water level equals to water level at the entry (Pressure gradient=0). In our case we are talking about free surface flow. The equation is not be entirely similar.

[serenitynow]

The moored hulls are obstructing the flow and actually causing water upstream to pile up higher. A river is not a pipe and any water accelerated by the props will pile up immediately downstream and then outward in all directions including back upstream. The net effect is actually negative and a complete waste of energy, machinery and manpower.

The hulls obstructing the water flow at the surface is a good point.

The water flowing back upstream causing a net effect that is negative is very silly.

Ever see an eddy in a river? Force vectors my friend.

[MaxYakov]

< snipped a lot of confusing and badly-quoted text >

@jetsetBkk@GentlemanJim!

Here is error of "jetsetBKK" thinking: He says,that ZERO energy is added to the river(the last line is about ScienceMinister,the line before - this one I am referring to).

However to make the push - boat propeller props water with much higher velocity then velocity of boat itself.

This water is losing contact with boat moment after it leaves propeller but it retains the energy and it travels submerged in main current mixing with it and

transfering its energy into main current and its initial vector is - downstream!Here I've got you JetsetterBKK!

Do not tell me that energy from boat propeller is dispersed/converted into thermal energy.Do Sir Newton a favoure and make scientific experiment in your kitchen:

try to boil some water in your juice blender!no matter how long you try - you will fail.Are you convinced?

Anchored boats could run engines full throttle producing faster torrent remaining still.

But all this doesnt matter because this thread is about - politics!no kidding..

However to make the push - boat propeller props water with much higher velocity then velocity of boat itself.

Don't forget that the boat is tied-up and pointing upstream so there is already water velocity relative to the boat.

Do not tell me that energy from boat propeller is dispersed/converted into thermal energy.Do Sir Newton a favoure and make scientific experiment in your kitchen:

try to boil some water in your juice blender!no matter how long you try - you will fail.Are you convinced?

Is it OK if we just do this as a 'thought experiment'? My blender is made of plastic and I wouldn't want any 'Unintended Consequences' while I'm operating it at 100K RPM.

But all this doesnt matter because this thread is about - politics!no kidding..

Absolutely agree. Beginning with the Ministry of Science's grand experiment.

Edited October 17, 2011 by MaxYakov

[FOODLOVER]

"Do not tell me that energy from boat propeller is dispersed/converted into thermal energy.Do Sir Newton a favoure and make scientific experiment in your kitchen:

try to boil some water in your juice blender!no matter how long you try - you will fail".

I do know a bit about blenders and you can in fact bring water to an extremely high temperature with a high speed blender. In fact you can cook food in a blender with the friction. Breaking sauces in blenders can happen because of the heat produced.