IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> MARIA
Sargasso
post Sep 20 2004, 09:15 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



I've been working on a coutsomized deep diving suit for a campaign I've got going. The Cannon companion lists the LBA (Liquid breathing aparatus) as being rated for 3000 meter dives, yet there's no way a human body can ednure those depths in a flimsy dive suit. The JIM is a mechanical dive suit, but rated for only 600 meters. I've got the write up, sans the technical stats for my coutsomized dive suit here. let me know what you all think, and how much you think the system ought to cost. I'm thinking more then :nuyen: 120,000 apeice.

A MARIA (Marine Amniotic Repair and Investigation Anthromorph) is a deep diving suit rated to dive to 3000 meters. A MARIA is always equipped with a rigger black box, and cannot be piloted by any other means. MARIAs are characterized by having a large abdominal bulge, no head and a waddling gait. The MARIA is has a cockpit, rather then being a worn suit, in the strict sense. The abdominal bulge is the WOMB (Water Operations Manning Booth ). The WOMB is filled with an LBA (Liquid Breathing Apparatus), and the pilot slips into a well cushioned oval space in a fetal position. Electric massaging liners keep the rigger’s body from suffering any aches or lack of circulation during the what could be the MARIA’s 20 hours of dive time.
Due to the long duration a dive may take, and the obvious physical needs, MARIAs are equipped with catheters, an IV drip (with nutrients) and a rating 3 medical kit, all of which run autonomously, but can be controlled by the rigger if they wish. Because of the MARIA’s unique design, its Envrio-Sealtm technology is only compromised if the vehicle suffers a serious wound, or the WOMB itself suffers damage, using the subsystem damage rules. MARIAs have a body rating of 3, as they are at the low end of the body 3 scale. They’re 500 kg, but only the size of a somewhat corpulent troll.
The MARIA is typically supported by a dedicated medium to small sub with facilities for replacing the oxygenated fluid in the LBA, removing waste, and resupplying the IV drip and power cells. Theoretically, a rigger can operate a MARIA indefinitely, but standard procedure lists 72 continuous hours as the absolute limit. Obviously, the rigger sleeps for some portion of that time, and many of the MARIA riggers consider sleeping in the WOMB quite comfortable. A MARIA’s electric fuel cell is nearly entirely dedicated to it’s features, and has little room for modification. The Mechanical arms (Str 12) are adapted from beta-ware troll cyberlimbs, with extensive integrity enhancements. Floodlights and spotlights allow for ordinary sensors to be used in short range, and sonar is the only sensor feasible in the depths.

Oops, two obvious betaware limbs would run one :nuyen:300,000 in the first place. Nevermind all the enhancements. I suppose that makes MARIAs...say, :nuyen: 600,000. what do you think?

This post has been edited by Sargasso: Sep 20 2004, 09:39 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lokugh
post Sep 20 2004, 09:38 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 1-September 04
Member No.: 6,621



Actually, that is not true. The human body can withstand those pressures, assuming you give it time to do so. What happens is that the air spaces in the body increase in pressure to compensate for the exterior pressure. As long as you give it time to accomplish this, you theoretically can survive deep dives. The problems would be cold and breathing, which is what the LBA is for. You would need a heated dry suit to go along with the LBA and take your time.

If you are trying to make a hardsuit to compensate for the pressures, you are probably just going to have to design a one man submarine. In your example, you do not need the LBA. Why? Because an LBA is only necessary at depth because of the pressure on the body. Since you are making a hardsuit to compensate for that, then a normal air supply is fine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 20 2004, 09:41 PM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



QUOTE (lokugh)
Actually, that is not true. The human body can withstand those pressures, assuming you give it time to do so. What happens is that the air spaces in the body increase in pressure to compensate for the exterior pressure. As long as you give it time to accomplish this, you theoretically can survive deep dives. The problems would be cold and breathing, which is what the LBA is for. You would need a heated dry suit to go along with the LBA and take your time.

If you are trying to make a hardsuit to compensate for the pressures, you are probably just going to have to design a one man submarine. In your example, you do not need the LBA. Why? Because an LBA is only necessary at depth because of the pressure on the body. Since you are making a hardsuit to compensate for that, then a normal air supply is fine.

What you've said it definately ture, but the hardsuit has its own attributes, and a theoretically limitless underwater duration. It also keeps the rigger nice and safe inside, whereas a jim leaves your limbs dangerously within the limbs of the hardsuit, while you manipulate big peices of metal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lokugh
post Sep 20 2004, 09:43 PM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 1-September 04
Member No.: 6,621



Yep. I'm just saying that it is not necessary for deep diving...not that it would not be advatageous. Your first post seemed to indicate it wasn't possible. Sorry if I misunderstood.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 20 2004, 09:44 PM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



You're right. I meant to say that it;s not possible to go up and down regularly. The pressure acclimation and *de*pressurization nessacary are insane. Presumably, a valkarie module and the drugs of the 2060's can help, but with a MARIA you can go up and down without a problem.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
the_dunner
post Sep 21 2004, 12:05 AM
Post #6


Shooting Target
****

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 1,784
Joined: 28-July 04
From: Cleveland, OH
Member No.: 6,522



Let give the caveat that I don't know a damned thing about Deep Sea Diving. But, having said that, this device seems a little pointless to me.

It can only be piloted by a rigger, right?

When a rigger's driving, he doesn't have access to his biological inputs, only the inputs of the vehicle he's controlling.

Since that's the case, wouldn't it be dramatically more efficient and MUCH less dangerous to use a drone?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lokugh
post Sep 21 2004, 12:13 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 1-September 04
Member No.: 6,621



Actually, not necessarily, if you ever plan to use it from the surface. For shallow diving, a drone would be better. But for really deep diving, this works better. For one thing, enough water blocks electromagnetic radiation, which means to keep control, you need a cable attached. Ever seen what 3000 meters of cable weighs? I mean cable heavy enough to not only include control lines, but also heavy enough to support itself? A lot.

So, if this thing is self motivating, you avoid the need for all that cable, which means a smaller boat and less expense, for one thing. However, you are right if you plan to operate it from a sub, then, yes, a drone might actually be much better.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
the_dunner
post Sep 21 2004, 12:18 AM
Post #8


Shooting Target
****

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 1,784
Joined: 28-July 04
From: Cleveland, OH
Member No.: 6,522



Good point about the EM blockage. You're definitely right, that'd limit the range on a drone, so you'd definitely need a sub or undersea base nearby. However, without the sub, it's only got 20 hours use time.

Like I said before, I don't know anything about deep sea diving. However, I was under the impression that it'd take at least a few hours just to descend and a comparable time to resurface when you're talking about a 3000m depth? If so, does this have the longevity to be practical for autonomous operation?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 12:47 AM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



The rigger book goes out of it's way to note that deep sea drones require cable. This vehicle's primary funtion is deep sea work, such as salvage and contruction. The MARIA is often based with a submarine to continuously resupply it, but is autonomous for up to 20 hours at a time. This lets riggers have a walking vehicle with plenty of good leverage and strength. There's no reason why a a Sub could have cable attached MARIA drones, but that's likely to cause an accident eventually. Heck, aMARIA could have a host of MARIA drones attached as well. Immagine a deep water rigger with a salvage company. Him, five MARIAs, and a support sub. He's inside a cozy MARIA for a week at a stretch, and everything else is attached to his MARIA by cables, while he pilots evenything like any other done network.

<edit> Oh, the MARIa mechanically could stay under for a long time, it's the metahuman occupant who can't inside for too long. MARIAs could go into a facility, like a research station or large submarine. I hope everyone's seen "The Abyss" :-P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cray74
post Sep 21 2004, 01:16 AM
Post #10


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,428
Joined: 9-June 02
Member No.: 2,860



If you're stuffing the occupant into a fairly spherical chamber, the liquid breathing apparatus is sheer overkill. 3000 meters depth resistance is not hard to get out of a pressure vessel. About 100 atmospheres...for a 1.5m diameter, 1cm thick vessel...that's only about 55000psi in the shell.

1cm of cheap automotive steel could almost handle that, and certainly high strength (70-75ksi) aluminum could. For a safety margin, common Ti-6Al-4V titanium could handle the pressure (120ksi yield), as could a decent maraging steel (300M: 300ksi yield strength).

There's no need for that liquid breathing apparatus unless the designers are sadists. An adequate steel, aluminum, or titanium pressure vessel could keep the occupant in a sea level-pressure, air-filled environment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 01:19 AM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



Well, the MARIa's designed to be as compact a powerhouse as possible. A rigger's not aware of their body wle rigging. Packing the rigger in the WOMB with an LBA does a few things. It keeps the rigger cozy, (massaging liners remember? Plus, a fetal position's fairly comfortable) and it means the mechanics of the MARIA don't have people's limbs in the way. It packs the pilot into a small surface area toom, as spheres have the lowest surface area of any object, this is neary spherical. It means the reinforcement nessecary can be reduced in surface area, and therefore, reduced in mass. More mass can be dedicated to mechanics.

Besides, I think a warm WOMB might be cozy, like....well..the womb. :-P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cray74
post Sep 21 2004, 09:29 AM
Post #12


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,428
Joined: 9-June 02
Member No.: 2,860



QUOTE (Sargasso)
Well, the MARIa's designed to be as compact a powerhouse as possible. A rigger's not aware of their body wle rigging. Packing the rigger in the WOMB with an LBA does a few things. It keeps the rigger cozy, (massaging liners remember? Plus, a fetal position's fairly comfortable) and it means the mechanics of the MARIA don't have people's limbs in the way. It packs the pilot into a small surface area toom, as spheres have the lowest surface area of any object, this is neary spherical. It means the reinforcement nessecary can be reduced in surface area, and therefore, reduced in mass. More mass can be dedicated to mechanics.


I know, that's why I assumed a spherical shell in my calculations.

The weight of a fluid-filled, 1-man, spherical compartment is going to be around 700-750kg, just counting the perfluorocarbon breathing liquids (dense liquids, 50% more than water) and not the shell. The air-pressurized, 1cm thick, 1.5m-diameter titanium shell would be around 160kg. It would be 70-75kg for a 1m diameter shell, and about half of either of those values with an aluminum shell (90kg or 40kg).

So you're not saving weight by shifting to LBA - you're adding a lot of weight with an LBA in the form of negative buoyancy. LBA's liquids will sink in water.

You're also introducing the element of risk: a MARIA operator has liquid-filled lungs to contend with when they need to abandon the MARIA. The rigger may not be aware of their body while rigging, but when they leave the MARIA, they'll know they have liquid in their lungs.

The coziness aspect is not unique to a liquid-breathing apparatus. The rigger's limbs can likewise be ignored in an air-filled compartment, just as in the LBA. The LBA does not grant a special ability to keep the rigger cozy; the massaging liners do, and those work fine in an air-filled compartment. The LBA does not grant a special ability to stuff the rigger into a fetal position, which can be done in an air-filled compartment.

In short, the air-filled compartment does not hinder your ability to generate a "compact powerhouse." In fact, it helps the effort a lot by ditching hundreds of kilograms of dead weight (the LBA fluid), and it doesn't hinder the comfort of the occupant. The LBA compartment is a nice aesthetic concept, but it's hindering your goals.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 12:41 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



Hmm, aside from mass adding to leverage, the only possible benefit of the LBA isthat it might be easier to store oxygen. is it more weight efficent to supersaturate the liquid, or to high pressurize gas?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon-Hawk
post Sep 21 2004, 03:15 PM
Post #14


Genuine Artificial Intelligence
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,019
Joined: 12-June 03
Member No.: 4,715



Not to hijack this thread or anything, but there should be a health spell that, while sustained, allows the subject to instantly repressurize when going up or down. No crushing on the way down, no boiling blood on the way up. Or maybe just decreases the time necessary by a factor of Force. Even decreasing the time exponentially by force wouldn't be too much.

edited to stay on topic: More on topic, I was also under the impression that LBA was for when the diver would be exposed to pressure. Maybe the MARIA has an exjection WOMB, in case of emergency, and the LBA helps them return to the surface without problems in that case? I mean, even in a hard suit you're pressurized some, and coming up VERY fast might be a problem. I'm not sure, though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 03:16 PM
Post #15


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



That would be a cool health spell. I'd consider that a major change, probably serious drain, but useful in the extreme. I suppose that makes one wonder if there ought to be a spell to stave off the affects of depth, like nitrogen narcosis for example.

-Oh, I think I'll drop the MARIA's limbs down to alpha-ware. It's a :nuyen: 300,000 difference. :-P I'm sure loading up all the MARIA's arms' ECU with integrity enhancements, and stacking on more str will be fine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cray74
post Sep 21 2004, 03:24 PM
Post #16


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,428
Joined: 9-June 02
Member No.: 2,860



QUOTE (Sargasso)
Hmm, aside from mass adding to leverage, the only possible benefit of the LBA isthat it might be easier to store oxygen. is it more weight efficent to supersaturate the liquid, or to high pressurize gas?

I think it's most mass efficient to store oxygen as liquid oxygen (not dissolved in a liquid, but as liquid oxygen). LOX is a mildly cryogenic liquid and fairly easy to handle. I've seen doctors keep a liquid nitrogen (similar temps to LOX) in a common thermos on their desk and report that it stays filled all day (not much boil off).

However, compressed oxygen isn't a bad approach, either. A typical 80 cubic foot SCUBA tank holds (IIRC) about 2kg of gas. An adult human uses about 2kg oxygen in 24 hours. So If...

1) The tank holds pure oxygen, and
2) MARIA's crew capsule is pre-filled with a normal oxygen/nitrogen mix, and
3) MARIA recycles air (primarily scrubbing out CO2 and metering in replacement oxygen), and
4) MARIA's crew capsule is kept at 1 atmosphere of pressure,

...then a typical 80cf SCUBA tank should last the MARIA operator about 24 hours. Typical SCUBA consumption rates are much higher, but that's because they're releasing the gas at higher pressures, and only contain about 20% oxygen. However, with the air recycling system, the nitrogen in the crew capsule isn't depleted, so you only need to store oxygen in the tank.

The tank won't be as light as an insulated container of LOX, but it'll be more convenient and available. Compressed air, even pure oxygen, are commonly available at SCUBA filling stations. Not that LOX is expensive or rare, it's just you're more likely to be able to get pressurized O2 at diving facilities than LOX. The weights for SCUBA tanks should be in the Cannon Companion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 03:25 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



That sounds spiffy. One of the key features of the MARIA is that it can resupplied while still in a dive. A small auxilary tank to run on while the old tank is being refilled/replaced and they're good to go.
<eidt> Besides, an emergency backup is a good thing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BitBasher
post Sep 21 2004, 03:29 PM
Post #18


Traumatizing players since 1992
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,282
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 220



QUOTE (Sargasso)
Hmm, aside from mass adding to leverage, the only possible benefit of the LBA isthat it might be easier to store oxygen. is it more weight efficent to supersaturate the liquid, or to high pressurize gas?

It's by far more efficient to supercompress the oxygen instead of it having a separate liquid medium.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon-Hawk
post Sep 21 2004, 03:33 PM
Post #19


Genuine Artificial Intelligence
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,019
Joined: 12-June 03
Member No.: 4,715



I still like the ejection WOMB idea. :D It just seems cool.
"Aaahh, my robot leg is trapped under a sunken ship! Power supply malfunction! It'll take too long for a rescue team to get down this far! Eject WOMB! Fwooooshhhh....AAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!! Splash! Yay!"

..........I'm so bored.

This new diving suit is a really cool idea, by the way.
"How do you solve a problem like MARIA?"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 03:34 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



With a thingamabob, a widget and wrench. :-P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 03:37 PM
Post #21


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



I'd forgetten entirely about one thing. Now that we've established we can give the thing 24 hours of air at a pop, what kind of engine will the thing be running on? I imagined a n electric fuel cell, but a fuel cell large enough to power a MARIA for 24 hours would likely be pretty massive. Suggestions?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Moon-Hawk
post Sep 21 2004, 03:40 PM
Post #22


Genuine Artificial Intelligence
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,019
Joined: 12-June 03
Member No.: 4,715



With a thingamabob, a widget, and a wrench. :P back atcha!

Fuel cell or battery would be my guess.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cray74
post Sep 21 2004, 04:33 PM
Post #23


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,428
Joined: 9-June 02
Member No.: 2,860



QUOTE (Sargasso)
I'd forgetten entirely about one thing. Now that we've established we can give the thing 24 hours of air at a pop, what kind of engine will the thing be running on? I imagined a n electric fuel cell, but a fuel cell large enough to power a MARIA for 24 hours would likely be pretty massive. Suggestions?

SR's electric fuel cells seem to have pretty good performance, so I'd recommend them. Plus, they're electric drives that can be powered from off-board supplies, like cables.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sargasso
post Sep 21 2004, 05:17 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-September 04
Member No.: 6,641



Yep, contemporary fuel cells have remained essentially unchanged for 100 years. Lead and sulfuric acid make *nearly* the best possible fuel cell, but they're way cheaper then the best current metal/acid combo. I suppose by 2060 they're figured out something better...somehow.

-<edit> oops, I mean amoung the worst, lead-acid. There are better reactions, but lead-acid is cheap.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lokugh
post Sep 21 2004, 05:26 PM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 1-September 04
Member No.: 6,621



QUOTE (Moon-Hawk)
I still like the ejection WOMB idea. :D It just seems cool.
"Aaahh, my robot leg is trapped under a sunken ship! Power supply malfunction! It'll take too long for a rescue team to get down this far! Eject WOMB! Fwooooshhhh....AAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!! Splash! Yay!"

..........I'm so bored.

This new diving suit is a really cool idea, by the way.
"How do you solve a problem like MARIA?"

What would actually happen at that point is "Eject WOMB! Arrrr..." as the person's body collapsed under the pressure. There is not much point to building the self-contained WOMB if you are not going to keep the pressure inside much lower than the exterior pressure. In which case, ejection would kill you due to the sudden pressure change.

This is a really cool idea though, I agree. Would make salvaging ship wrecks and the like much easier.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 8th April 2020 - 03:53 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.