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

[WarpSpeed]

You're right I'm the liar and the person who should take the word of some "bloke" on the Internet instead of my believing my own eyes because you posted a still photoshop, google maps jpeg of the runway minus the planes instead of the official video of a truck being blown several hundred yards away and still going .. Does that make your day now? I know it made mine ..

Fortunately for me we're talking about water movement by a propeller and not a massively strong engine like a jet ..

I'm sorry facts offend you, can't be helped though.

Yep you posted a host of facts there buddy and yet still can't even be gracious in imagined victory..

Edited October 20, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

I call BS!! 200meters? That truck was still being well pushed well beyond 200meters and the only reason it stopped was because it hit the water, what kind of airliner were you standing behind, a drone? And still it isn't about AIRFLOW that was just used to counter his point in an extreme example that, a propeller doesn't push flow rearwards it only pushes the boat forward and that is just bunk, it's counter forces that create the boats forward movement..

Just to clarify something you keep bringing up. I said a prop was designed to push the boat forward and not to push the water backwards. If they were designed to push the water backwards they would produce a linear flow of water. This is not the case. They produce a turbulent flow of water which is very inefficient in moving water backwards for any distance. Try keeping things in context.

A rose by any other name and a car engine is DESIGNED to push a car but people use them for all sorts of other purposes I.E powering long tail motorboats, point being just because it was DESIGNED for a singular purpose in mind doesn't mean it can't serve a second purpose just as well if modified to do so.. In this case the modification is to tie the boats in place.. Simple enough..

[WarpSpeed]

Well if I dropped the USS Enterprise in the river, the displacement would overflow the river for a start and the Ship would act as a dam and create more flooding and slow the flow down. Thats how I see the Idea.

Sure but that's a massively extreme example considering the draw on a ship that size.. So you propose removing all boats from the river? Do you think that would have a larger effect on the levels then the current idea being floated? Pun intended.. One problem with that idea is that is potentially an immediate, one time fix and not an ongoing action.

[JetsetBkk]

Yep you posted a host of facts there buddy and yet still can't even (be) gracious in imagined victory..

Even if we can't all agree on the outcome of this project, this thread has become a valuable repository of cutting retorts.

[WarpSpeed]

That river is about 10 meters deep on average and 200 to 1200 meters wide. The propellers of 1000 boats are only going to speed up some surface water down to one meter depth and for limited distance, maybe 50 meters before the extra energy is completely dissipated. Boats are also be spaced apart. So even at best case something like way less than one percent of the water will be handled. Not worth the trouble.

Nice one

ask yourself this.. if the water is coming in at X speed and leaving at Y speed, what is the reason? the answer of course is RESISTANCE. No matter what you do with boat probs the effect will be minimal to say the least. the maximum ability of the river to carry the water is of course determined by its width, depth, fall and the weeds and crap that are clung to it.

Everything has a maximum capability, however defined, and the river in BKK is running at its max. very little can be done to speed it up at this stage and, widening. clearing and deepening apart ( which isnt going to happen now) there is NOTHING anyone can do to speed up the flow. The water is entering at a faster speed than it can leave.. result, rsing water and end result.. overflow

But I am sure the inventor of the idea of the boat props was a great PR guy and motivator

No it isn't, it's flowing at the rate of gravity on a virtually flat plain which frankly is not that fast..

This river for example is much lower and flowing much faster with many obstacles in it's way yet it flows at a much higher rate.. Why? Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Edited October 20, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

Yep you posted a host of facts there buddy and yet still can't even (be) gracious in imagined victory..

Even if we can't all agree on the outcome of this project, this thread has become a valuable repository of cutting retorts.

Where'd you see that?

[BuckarooBanzai]

No it isn't, it's flowing at the rate of gravity on a virtually flat plain which frankly is not that fast..

This river for example is much lower and flowing much faster with many obstacles in it's way yet it flows at a much higher rate.. Why? Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Bangkok! White Water Hub Of Southeast Asia!!!

[WarpSpeed]

No it isn't, it's flowing at the rate of gravity on a virtually flat plain which frankly is not that fast..

This river for example is much lower and flowing much faster with many obstacles in it's way yet it flows at a much higher rate.. Why? Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Bangkok! White Water Hub Of Southeast Asia!!!

Hard to dispute those visual examples isn't it? Quite penetrating hopefully..

[cloudhopper]

Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Quite so because water is incompressible however in our case of the moored boats both intake and output of the 'pump' remain within the river. The effect is then creating a depression in river elevation at the pump intake and creating an upward bulge at the outlet. The high pressure bulge forces water outward in ALL directions equally and the accelerated water flows in a 3D loop back into the depression created upstream at the intake. Zero water is accelerated directly downstream for any significant distance - it ALL curves back toward the low pressure area.

[bigbamboo]

I'm beginning to see why Thailand is now the land of miracles!

[WarpSpeed]

Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Quite so because water is incompressible however in our case of the moored boats both intake and output of the 'pump' remain within the river. The effect is then creating a depression in river elevation at the pump intake and creating an upward bulge at the outlet. The high pressure bulge forces water outward in ALL directions equally and the accelerated water flows in a 3D loop back into the depression created upstream at the intake. Zero water is accelerated directly downstream for any significant distance - it ALL curves back toward the low pressure area.

That only applies in magnitude in a static body of water not in a flowing river as the water continues to flow downstream with momentum just at a quicker pace, there will be some backflow but it is minimal in relation to the added downstream flow...

[AleG]

Yep you posted a host of facts there buddy and yet still can't even be gracious in imagined victory..

So you are disputing the fact regarding the distance from the point airplanes take off to the outer fence, as shown in the satellite photo I posted. (you can check yourself in Google Earth if you like)

A couple pages ago I replied to BuckarooBanzai's post about the energy dissipation behind a jetliner, that I had actually stood around 200 meters directly behind one and indeed wasn't blown away. You called that bullshit and impossible, since, as you claimed there's nowhere in the airport to stand at that distance and that planes take off hundreds of meters from the runway head anyway. The second is patently absurd and any pilot will tell you so, the first it's also false and I proved with the satellite image.

So I guess that this all boils down to an example of how people value their own unfunded ideas more than facts and evidence.

[cloudhopper]

Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Quite so because water is incompressible however in our case of the moored boats both intake and output of the 'pump' remain within the river. The effect is then creating a depression in river elevation at the pump intake and creating an upward bulge at the outlet. The high pressure bulge forces water outward in ALL directions equally and the accelerated water flows in a 3D loop back into the depression created upstream at the intake. Zero water is accelerated directly downstream for any significant distance - it ALL curves back toward the low pressure area.

That only applies in magnitude in a static body of water not in a flowing river as the water continues to flow downstream with momentum just at a quicker pace, there will be some backflow but it is minimal in relation to the added downstream flow...

I'm afraid that is not the case. The fact that the parcel of water that this entire circulation is occurring within is moving with respect to the bank or away from the pump is irrelevant.. The speed of the current will only (and very slightly with the low current vs. accelerated water speed in this case) distort the shape of the return current (as will the force of the pump). No matter how powerful a pump is used (in this way) equilibrium will be eventually restored by that mechanism and zero percent of that energy will add to the net downstream energy..

[fantuzi]

Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Quite so because water is incompressible however in our case of the moored boats both intake and output of the 'pump' remain within the river. The effect is then creating a depression in river elevation at the pump intake and creating an upward bulge at the outlet. The high pressure bulge forces water outward in ALL directions equally and the accelerated water flows in a 3D loop back into the depression created upstream at the intake. Zero water is accelerated directly downstream for any significant distance - it ALL curves back toward the low pressure area.

That only applies in magnitude in a static body of water not in a flowing river as the water continues to flow downstream with momentum just at a quicker pace, there will be some backflow but it is minimal in relation to the added downstream flow...

CloudHopper? you think water will make u-turn?and it will go up - hill?

It flows down because of force of gravity combined with kinetic energy it contains.

The boat current will disperse itself in river current and will dissipate but its energy is there,the water molecules are there mostly(vapour makei it less)it doesnt go anywhere.

Energy produced by boat engine - ends in river.

This is the law of this universe.

You can see it performing exersise in your village stream with coloured water - use ordinary ink.

have a nice day

[cloudhopper]

CloudHopper? you think water will make u-turn?and it will go up - hill?

It flows down because of force of gravity combined with kinetic energy it contains.

Hi yes the water will make a U turn although the 3D shape of the flow is more like a doughnut until the flow is cut off by the surface or the riverbed. It does so because it is physically flowing downhill - from the high pressure surface bulge aft of the prop downhill into the low pressure area created forward of the prop. A much shorter therefore lower energy path for that accelerated water than the mouth of the river.

[slapout]

Taking the various flow rates being thrown out, upstream, the capacity of the CP river, the alternative/overflow routes designed by humans to handle flood periods, then consider the fill, concrete, housing, airport, industrial parks and other man made obstacles for drainage, success in preventing past/further flooding is most unlikely without a major overhaul of the system.

I am reminded of the old man who said, "the actions being taken have about as much chance of success as trying to stick a wet noodle up a wildcats arse" The one comparison which may help in how huge the problem is, a water supply tank standing 100 foot tall, continually supplied by water via a 11 inch inflow, the outlet at the bottom, is 10 inch and it goes into a 3 inch line. If the 2 inch is strong enough it prevents water leaving the supply source and the tank overflows along predetermined routes and/or the 3 inch line springs a leak and the repair must be made around the leak/breach as no adequate valves/alternatives were installed. In all cases dry areas become wet areas. The addition of power boats at the 3 inch outlet will have virtually no impact on the real source of the problem.

[TommyDee]

That river is about 10 meters deep on average and 200 to 1200 meters wide. The propellers of 1000 boats are only going to speed up some surface water down to one meter depth and for limited distance, maybe 50 meters before the extra energy is completely dissipated. Boats are also be spaced apart. So even at best case something like way less than one percent of the water will be handled. Not worth the trouble.

Nice one

ask yourself this.. if the water is coming in at X speed and leaving at Y speed, what is the reason? the answer of course is RESISTANCE. No matter what you do with boat probs the effect will be minimal to say the least. the maximum ability of the river to carry the water is of course determined by its width, depth, fall and the weeds and crap that are clung to it.

Everything has a maximum capability, however defined, and the river in BKK is running at its max. very little can be done to speed it up at this stage and, widening. clearing and deepening apart ( which isnt going to happen now) there is NOTHING anyone can do to speed up the flow. The water is entering at a faster speed than it can leave.. result, rsing water and end result.. overflow

But I am sure the inventor of the idea of the boat props was a great PR guy and motivator

No it isn't, it's flowing at the rate of gravity on a virtually flat plain which frankly is not that fast..

This river for example is much lower and flowing much faster with many obstacles in it's way yet it flows at a much higher rate.. Why? Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

the water in BKK is not flowing at a "rate of gravity" on a flat plain, because it has the existing force behind it created between BKK and the source ( dams etc) that is the driving force. that force is then reduced by resistance within the river and increased by substantial fall in the river. you are partially right that were there a waterfall then the water would fall faster but once it hits the river bed it travels at a ratebased on fall plus existing force... minus resistance .

Pumps, ( massive from side to side) would indeed increase the flow but they would be from near the bottom to the top in depth. boat props will do nothing, well dam_n near nothing anyway.

[cloudhopper]

the water in BKK is not flowing at a "rate of gravity" on a flat plain, because it has the existing force behind it created between BKK and the source ( dams etc) that is the driving force. that force is then reduced by resistance within the river and increased by substantial fall in the river. you are partially right that were there a waterfall then the water would fall faster but once it hits the river bed it travels at a ratebased on fall plus existing force... minus resistance .

Pumps, ( massive from side to side) would indeed increase the flow but they would be from near the bottom to the top in depth. boat props will do nothing, well dam_n near nothing anyway.

Sorry TommyDee that's not how it works. Fall is the only force moving the river. There is no "existing force". You can only send force through a liquid when it is confined like by a piston inside a cylinder where the return flow is cut off.

[TommyDee]

the water in BKK is not flowing at a "rate of gravity" on a flat plain, because it has the existing force behind it created between BKK and the source ( dams etc) that is the driving force. that force is then reduced by resistance within the river and increased by substantial fall in the river. you are partially right that were there a waterfall then the water would fall faster but once it hits the river bed it travels at a ratebased on fall plus existing force... minus resistance .

Pumps, ( massive from side to side) would indeed increase the flow but they would be from near the bottom to the top in depth. boat props will do nothing, well dam_n near nothing anyway.

Sorry TommyDee that's not how it works. Fall is the only force moving the river. There is no "existing force". You can only send force through a liquid when it is confined like by a piston inside a cylinder where the return flow is cut off.

sorry cloud. if that were true, then there would be virtually no flow, its flowing at one end, so less any resistance it will flow at the other. dont u think the pressure of force from "up north" is the same as a piston???

[WarpSpeed]

Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Quite so because water is incompressible however in our case of the moored boats both intake and output of the 'pump' remain within the river. The effect is then creating a depression in river elevation at the pump intake and creating an upward bulge at the outlet. The high pressure bulge forces water outward in ALL directions equally and the accelerated water flows in a 3D loop back into the depression created upstream at the intake. Zero water is accelerated directly downstream for any significant distance - it ALL curves back toward the low pressure area.

That only applies in magnitude in a static body of water not in a flowing river as the water continues to flow downstream with momentum just at a quicker pace, there will be some backflow but it is minimal in relation to the added downstream flow...

I'm afraid that is not the case. The fact that the parcel of water that this entire circulation is occurring within is moving with respect to the bank or away from the pump is irrelevant.. The speed of the current will only (and very slightly with the low current vs. accelerated water speed in this case) distort the shape of the return current (as will the force of the pump). No matter how powerful a pump is used (in this way) equilibrium will be eventually restored by that mechanism and zero percent of that energy will add to the net downstream energy..

I'm sorry but that is not the case..

[WarpSpeed]

Elevation which can be artificially reproduced with an a accelerant such as a pump..

Quite so because water is incompressible however in our case of the moored boats both intake and output of the 'pump' remain within the river. The effect is then creating a depression in river elevation at the pump intake and creating an upward bulge at the outlet. The high pressure bulge forces water outward in ALL directions equally and the accelerated water flows in a 3D loop back into the depression created upstream at the intake. Zero water is accelerated directly downstream for any significant distance - it ALL curves back toward the low pressure area.

That only applies in magnitude in a static body of water not in a flowing river as the water continues to flow downstream with momentum just at a quicker pace, there will be some backflow but it is minimal in relation to the added downstream flow...

CloudHopper? you think water will make u-turn?and it will go up - hill?

It flows down because of force of gravity combined with kinetic energy it contains.

The boat current will disperse itself in river current and will dissipate but its energy is there,the water molecules are there mostly(vapour makei it less)it doesnt go anywhere.

Energy produced by boat engine - ends in river.

This is the law of this universe.

You can see it performing exersise in your village stream with coloured water - use ordinary ink.

have a nice day

Absolutely correct ..

[WarpSpeed]

Taking the various flow rates being thrown out, upstream, the capacity of the CP river, the alternative/overflow routes designed by humans to handle flood periods, then consider the fill, concrete, housing, airport, industrial parks and other man made obstacles for drainage, success in preventing past/further flooding is most unlikely without a major overhaul of the system.

I am reminded of the old man who said, "the actions being taken have about as much chance of success as trying to stick a wet noodle up a wildcats arse" The one comparison which may help in how huge the problem is, a water supply tank standing 100 foot tall, continually supplied by water via a 11 inch inflow, the outlet at the bottom, is 10 inch and it goes into a 3 inch line. If the 2 inch is strong enough it prevents water leaving the supply source and the tank overflows along predetermined routes and/or the 3 inch line springs a leak and the repair must be made around the leak/breach as no adequate valves/alternatives were installed. In all cases dry areas become wet areas. The addition of power boats at the 3 inch outlet will have virtually no impact on the real source of the problem.

Yes that's a given and the water being moved downstream quicker is an attempt at getting it to a place that can more readily accept those large volumes such as lower lying areas out bound of the city.

[cloudhopper]

dont u think the pressure of force from "up north" is the same as a piston???

No because there is no pressure from "up north". Water in a river is not confined like hydraulic fluid in a cylinder and therefore cannot be pushed downstream, upstream or any other stream in any sustained way. That simple fact alone makes me wonder where are the physics and engineering professors who should be out there screaming <deleted> at this misallocation of resources in time of national crisis.

[steveromagnino]

dont u think the pressure of force from "up north" is the same as a piston???

No because there is no pressure from "up north". Water in a river is not confined like hydraulic fluid in a cylinder and therefore cannot be pushed downstream, upstream or any other stream in any sustained way. That simple fact alone makes me wonder where are the physics and engineering professors who should be out there screaming <deleted> at this misallocation of resources in time of national crisis.

they have already been on Thai PBS and other stations rubbishing the scheme.

But when you are up against channel 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 and Thai Raht (either idiotic talking heads who smile a lot news coverage or government favouring news institutions) naturally that coverage isn't so wide.

Edited October 20, 2011 by steveromagnino

[WarpSpeed]

the water in BKK is not flowing at a "rate of gravity" on a flat plain, because it has the existing force behind it created between BKK and the source ( dams etc) that is the driving force. that force is then reduced by resistance within the river and increased by substantial fall in the river. you are partially right that were there a waterfall then the water would fall faster but once it hits the river bed it travels at a ratebased on fall plus existing force... minus resistance .

Pumps, ( massive from side to side) would indeed increase the flow but they would be from near the bottom to the top in depth. boat props will do nothing, well dam_n near nothing anyway.

Sorry TommyDee that's not how it works. Fall is the only force moving the river. There is no "existing force". You can only send force through a liquid when it is confined like by a piston inside a cylinder where the return flow is cut off.

sorry cloud. if that were true, then there would be virtually no flow, its flowing at one end, so less any resistance it will flow at the other. dont u think the pressure of force from "up north" is the same as a piston???

I disagree, the truth is somewhere in between the both of your summations, there is an "existing force" in a river that's open ended. We're getting into real physics and hydraulics here now but water in the northern hemisphere only flows south due to the rotational mass of the earth which in turn creates a gravitational pull at the earths widest point being the equator and the only thing that can change this factor is elevation (meaning it may cause water to flow north temporarily depending on the substance it is flowing in I.E. rock) hence the reason for switchbacks in naturally flowing rivers but eventually in all cases the water will seek the lowest point and continue to flow south and elevation is the only other factor that determines rate of flow, gravitational rate of flow is constant at sea level or on a flat plain.

This is also why rivers in the southern hemisphere flow north. It's a combination of elevation and Earths rotational mass, not either/or ..

Ironically Tommy is suggesting that water carries it's own momentum from it's source which would support the boat propeller theory as the energy being transferred to the water could then be argued to have infinite momentum which is not the case but the increased volume moved does create it's own momentum once past the pumping source, not unlike the dams he's speaking of.

Edited October 20, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

dont u think the pressure of force from "up north" is the same as a piston???

No because there is no pressure from "up north". Water in a river is not confined like hydraulic fluid in a cylinder and therefore cannot be pushed downstream, upstream or any other stream in any sustained way. That simple fact alone makes me wonder where are the physics and engineering professors who should be out there screaming <deleted> at this misallocation of resources in time of national crisis.

Not true, see my post above..

[cloudhopper]

We're getting into real physics and hydraulics here now but water in the northern hemisphere only flows south due to the rotational mass of the earth which in turn creates a gravitational pull at the earths widest point being the equator and the only thing that can change this factor is elevation (meaning it may cause water to flow north temporarily depending on the substance it is flowing in I.E. rock) hence the reason for switchbacks in naturally flowing rivers but eventually in all cases the water will seek the lowest point and continue to flow south and elevation is the only other factor that determines rate of flow, gravitational rate of flow is constant at sea level or on a flat plain.

This is also why rivers in the southern hemisphere flow north. It's a combination of elevation and Earths rotational mass, not either/or ..

No, we're entering WarpSpeed world now.

[AleG]

I disagree, the truth is somewhere in between the both of your summations, there is an "existing force" in a river that's open ended. We're getting into real physics and hydraulics here now but water in the northern hemisphere only flows south due to the rotational mass of the earth which in turn creates a gravitational pull at the earths widest point being the equator and the only thing that can change this factor is elevation (meaning it may cause water to flow north temporarily depending on the substance it is flowing in I.E. rock) hence the reason for switchbacks in naturally flowing rivers but eventually in all cases the water will seek the lowest point and continue to flow south and elevation is the only other factor that determines rate of flow, gravitational rate of flow is constant at sea level or on a flat plain.

This is also why rivers in the southern hemisphere flow north. It's a combination of elevation and Earths rotational mass, not either/or ..

...

That's nonsense, rivers flow downhill, period. Only ocean currents are affected (measurably) by the Earth's rotation.

Amazon? goes East, down from the highlands around the Andes to the Atlantic, Uruguay-Parana River system (second in size to Amazon in S. America) goes South. Second longest river, the Orinoco flows East and ends with a turn to the North at the delta.

Africa, Congo River goes North, then West, down South and West again in a big loop. The Nile flows North crossing the equator, because it starts at the higher elevation of the Eastern African Plateau.

Most rivers in Northern Europe and Asia flow North.

As said, there's no centrifugal force drawing the rivers anywhere.

[TommyDee]

for what ever reason

http://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson/geol204/riversystems.htm

[ResX]

dont u think the pressure of force from "up north" is the same as a piston???

No because there is no pressure from "up north". Water in a river is not confined like hydraulic fluid in a cylinder and therefore cannot be pushed downstream, upstream or any other stream in any sustained way. That simple fact alone makes me wonder where are the physics and engineering professors who should be out there screaming <deleted> at this misallocation of resources in time of national crisis.

We have a situation here. I have mentioned this once. I'm going to mention it again so that we don't go on and on without anybody owns the truth and the lie. We must define what sort of control volume we are talking about. Putting 1000 boats at the bottom of water fall cannot attract the water from any section of the water fall to travel faster. Why? The water being pushed by the propellers and the waterfall have not shared any common control volume. They are two separate systems. Any change in water level at the bottom, there is no way the information can travel upwards. The propellers can only influence if the nature of control volume is reservoir liked flood plain.

Edited October 20, 2011 by ResX