Stopping Oil Spill - with Sound

Crank your amplifiers to "11" and hit it with some hard-driving Rock & Roll, baby!

But be careful with the music selection. Playing something with too much awesome in it runs the risk of igniting the well or cracking the crust of the Earth. This would anger the Mole People and doom us all.

This "Guest" in CR4 does not deserve the kind of honor a normal guest would deserve of hospitality in a good home, primarily because of hiding the identity like a thief would.

Adaptive Noise Cancellation is a different genre from production of music-all that you've done is to divert attention from a matter of serious concern by your flippant remarks!!

Please identify yourself after boning up on ANC and seeing its beneficience to the task at hand, viz. control of Oil spill.

Thanks for responding anyway.

Oh, my goodness!

Please do some serious research on SOH (Sense Of Humor). You'll feel better.

In any event, to address your post in a "non-flippant" manner, while using ANC is - I suppose - technically possible, the fact is in the present crisis there isn't time, money or resources to attempt such a complex and untested fix.

This is especially true given that there are at least a half-dozen far, far more plausible solutions. It would benefit us far more to concentrate on maximizing the success of those rather than speculate on pie-in-the-sky ideas. No offense.

I understand the principle. You probably want to send a standing wave into the pipe? Although it might be possible, I can't recall any research in this specific domain, where the oil has such a potential energy in motion.

Thanks for your understanding of the principle. ANC ensures near nullification of the energy of the gusher and thus brings about a measure of control over the phenomena.

Your're right, bringing about a standing wave in the oil column will enable a synchronized action of capping the well.

This thought process has its origin in the available technology of Adaptive (matched in real time) cancellation of the oscillations and the Vedic chants to quell fires.

You have to be kidding me! Please don't mix religious belief with serious science or engineering. İ can see how excited the BP engineers will be to recieve this bit of advice.

It shows clearly that you are yet to understand "ADAPTIVE" Noise Cancellation, a technique specifically meant for randomly variable (NOISE) sound.For regular fixed frequencies, you do not need adaptive NC, since the frequencies are known. Please open your mind and enable yourself to learn-you too will be able to contribute then!!

Thank you for the education. And, keep on dreaming.

since they are going to use 30,000HP pumps to kill the well, I would assuem that you'll need that kind of accoustical energy to do the same.

I believe the 300 RPM quitiplex pumps will add the correct amount of energy.

Thanks vicini. Since you have a number (30,000HP ≈ 22MW) it seems manageable. An aircraft carrier churns out 25 MW or more. The Navies use Acoustic sources to bring out acoustic mines. So, it's a matter of scaling up the equipment and coupling to ANC systems to achieve the purpose of neutralizing the random vibration energy of the gusher, even if it be for a short duration of 10-15 minutes, to position a ROV carrying a capping device/dome or whatever.

Just use hay.

freeze it with ice plug, plumbers have been doing it for years, insert pipe into core and pump down liquid co until frozen in place....
Mitch the ex peugeot mech,

It is amazing how people lose contact with reality. I stopped being involved with bringing up solutions for the oil spill and so did many others. The "boxed in team" of involved solvers have demonstrated not to be able to anticipate to predictable disasters with short term solutions. Capping in the oil on the surface is probably a too easy job?

Though it should avoid the oil to do more harm. What I see now short term being done is a shame for engineering science. I do not even see a string of attempts. No try and error.

Or nothing publicly announced.

And here I go again, I wonder why? The solution to prevent the pollution is clearly there. Only, the first attempt has to be rescaled to a workable scale between the (non existing) infinite diameter of pipe (the gulf waters provide no walls) there is now and a workable restricting diameter. It is sufficient to look at the problems they encounter: in one word: walling in the spill. Not with the floating barriers, that prove inefficient, but a big enough pipe from the source up to the top.

Think a small ocean in a a ocean, separated with a wall. A condom with 2 openings and a strong wall. In safety science, this is step 2 to approach a risk. (step 1 is elimination of the source) BP is clearly skipping this step (2) and works now on step 3 = individual protection, gas masks, protecting suits - but not for fish and other ocean creatures) while long term step one will be their goal.

This reservoir wall pipe will NOT STOP the well from producing oil.

I challenge the whole society to bring the walling theory down.

Clearly, that joke hose they used doesn't come close by. And I also do not understand that the data of this spill, of which the catastrophic consequences is clearly a public matter, can be kept so "secret" and misleading to the same public.

About your post here Doctor,

I have some words to add too.

This however is a pure theoretical approach, and I lack the funds to do research on it,

BUT:

As long as the speed of the flow is below the speed of sound in the outflowing oil. A well directed series of waves can be injected into the pipe - where the pipe will act as a low(er) frequency Lecher pipe, in which a standing wave can be projected. I dare to say that the length gives a broad base of experiments, to determine, where in the pipe this will be established. (with 1800 Ft, there is some space) This wave could be established with with a fraction of the energy that the fluid might produce, because a resonance circuit has to do the work. The flow will be disturbed and eventually stopped when an equilibrium has been attained. There are examples of doing this in smaller pipes and lower flows. I remember videos on U tube, where gas current are modulated with standing audio waves. So technically this should be possible, at least I have an open mind for understanding that this could be one of the future oil spill stoppers for specific locations. Practically, however

The oil and the character will have a extremely high damping effect on whatever you will send in the pipe. But sperm goes to the egg too. This makes your idea a grey zone object. Van

You are talking about a flexible membrane that is 5,000 feet long, and capable of containing millions of cubic feet of oil and gas?The gas is flammable, yes?

How do you control this monster?

This makes as much sense as playing music to stem the flow.

I believe the true scope of this outflow is completely lost on you and the ANR advocate.

Good luck.

Hi Lynlynch, I suppose that you refer to the height of the water from the bottom of the ocean? You are right that a membrane will be difficult to control. Especially when the diameter is too small. But I follow Cherryvan also. Now there is no membrane at all. One tries to create an artificial barrier with the floating devices. Recuperation is not possible this way. If they had a few meters membrane underneath, it should work a lot better especially with the waves that make the oil spill underneath. If you reconsider the idea and replace the membrane with a substantially strong hose or pipe, (think big diameter ribbed drainage tunnels) and letting the oil mix with some water, I have a strong feeling that the wall will not collapse. A long plastic hose (like it is blown out of a extruder) will possibly not survive indeed, although it is worth a test.

I think a adequate separation can be achieved and the 1500 meter height should also create a density based separator, where the oil floats on top. ( Pumping this out, a little lower than the surface, will control the monster with lower explosion risk and a workable water content)

Of course, this is also nothing but a temporary plaster on the wound. I have mentioned it also in different posts, with pros and cons.

The sound experiment solution is a non tested idea, but could be explored for future uses.(only in the solid pipe part in the soil)

We all hope to see a capping to stop the well. With due respect, D

This could work - if you could focus the power into an open and lineal pipe.

But that the pipe is reportedly breached and crimped / bent, severally, presents a major problem in producing any sort of standing wave with any effective energy density in the oil column.

The most I think you could expect is a 'noise canceled' leak - I.e. still leaking but now it can't be heard (at a specific predetermined distance).

The other problem is reportedly the well casing concreting is damaged and possibly insecure, meaning large amounts of energy might result in its ejection. Hit that resonance and you have a quantum leap in flow.

Energy wise, I see this as as analogous to a series of depth charges detonated above the well in the hope of stopping the flow, whereas I would not recommend the use of one (in the hope of flattening the pipe).

Part 2 is; how do you fit a plug, or fix / close the tap, with that going on.

Or do you intend it to run till - whenever?

Right about all, I was thinking the tract in the bedrock should be quite linear.

Slight bends should pose a minor problem.

That is the area to work in. Although about the sound stop system: I think it is ready to take into lab research for later development.

To all cost the pipe may not be brought to resonance and should stay in place.

Of course, when the sound - I expect it to be close to sub sonics - stops - the oil is there again. (On the other hand, if the pipe slides up and could be guided all the way up. 7000 Feet (if it is that long) - I dont know how, maybe the pressure is not high enough to overcome that height. and probably the drill hole will cave in too with the erosion. - read this with a big pack of salt... that is Fantasy)

To exploit this well hole in the future? A big NO should be the answer, A professor from Russia suggested to launch a small heat generating nuke into the pipe to melt down pipe, rocks and everything over quite a height (distance of the bedrock pipe). They had failures before.

Well here is my latest and greatest idea... Underwater Balloons and Levers.

First you can use these ballons to lift and clear any junk from around the BOP's,
leaving just the BOP's as the source of oil.

Then Install the Ground Anchor Pivot; Place the Lever and Inverted Cap in place and actuate the lever by inflating the Big Balloons.

This will force the cap down over the leak with thousands of pounds of force....

If the Inverted Cap is big enough, it can cover all leakage. and oh ya.. no pipes or tubes, or further attempt to collect the oil... just cap it. The cap can be really heavy, which will help.. after that.. dump millions of pounds of sand/rubble on top of the cap.

I know its difficult.... and would take a while to build...

Whatcha think?

Chris

Chris, it is a beautiful presentation. The colors are also well chosen.

1.You will need to put or a lot of pressure in that balloon when you make it flexible, and you'll probably need to fill it up at that depth.(minimal 150 bar) No balloon can have that pressure above sea level.

And down below it will look like a vacuum'ed flat bag otherwise.

2. Or it will be a very large sphere (ball) in steel or metal, with a wall, exceeding 1 inch.

3. Or you command that balloon through a long cable to the surface to a buoy type balloon or even a pontoon or a vessel.

(about the floater - this are some thoughts)

The CAP:

The bigger surface you'll cap, the more weight your floater has to handle.

Works great in a toilet bowl. (but you see what a big balloon you need to close a small valve?) Ideal should be if you can plug the pipe or BOP on top with a point- shaped big bullet.

Sealing the area around your dome, will be almost impossible.

There is still a lot of pressure.

Reducing the surface makes it less complicated.

The FOUNDATION:

Here you will need a substantial anchored mass, like a concrete block with the pivoting shaft. This needs to withstand:

the upwards force of the oil in the pipe (pressure X surface) + the pulling force from the balloon, sphere or pontoon.

It is a lot of underwater construction: preparing the anchor space.

(or a big plug in a drilled hole - fixed to the rock) or a big mass of concrete. Say maybe 300 metric tons - to pour (sorry place) below with the pivot system. Hardening of the concrete: several weeks.

The COMPENSATION:

Tides and waves may affect the tension on the cable when you buy the floating device. You can make this tension loaded and hydraulic servo controlled winched.

If you go for this system, maybe a hinge system could be attached to the BOP? To save time of curing the concrete and do it low budget.

Beside a pivot you might also consider a parallel sliding (affut?) system, that will guide your bullet through the oil into the pipe.

The pin side of the bullet needs to be very sharp, so that the oil gets dispersed easy when lowering it down.

If the oil pressure down below is e.g 300 bar and the pipe diameter 50 cm, you will need a floating device that displaces 750 cubic meter. (lifting cap 750.000 kg) And your pivot point will need to take care of twice this force.

If you make a decision, tell me, I come to help you.

Chris, before you make it, let me do the calculations a little bit more precise pls. Regards, D.

D,

I didn't understand everything you said... but I think we are communicating.

1. As for the balloons, I definitely envision them being inflated subsurface.. (Nitrogen?)

2. Anchoring. We've talked about the weight of masses being ineffective when they are at that depth, which is why I suggested a method of anchoring into the bedrock. This will involve some drilling, but probably 50 feet will be enough, and I'm sure there are a variety of piling and screw anchors that could be implemented.

3. I'm not sure what you are calling the 'floater'.. but if balloon, then okay. for clarification, the blue in my picture is supposed to be water.

4. Sealing. We were told that there is something like four feet of mud. I would consider this sufficient to seal under a large cap.

5. Anchoring with mass. my first choice is to drill into the bedrock, and screw in huge piles. Second choice would be to place a large mass on top (sand?)(rubble?)(stacked steel plates?)(sink a ship on top = fast)

6. I won't be building anything. I'm just putting ideas out there for BP/TransOcean/Government to implement. I'm not interested in profiting.. just saving the carribean from a 20 year depression.

7.. yes the pivot/lever is required to be super strong. Can it be done? I believe yes.

Chris

Chris, I commented without being specific about the length of the arms, between load pivoting point and lift. Probably the lack of it will generate comments. The floating force can be reduced according the specific chosen lengths. Good post.

Nice design Chris, but does this in any way address the reason why the real cap attempt failed? From what I heard on the news, frozen clathrate filled the cap and this is why it could not be placed as necessary to stop the spill.

I can see these (little prototypes) standing on BP desks, to keep the coffee hot. There would be a few currents flowing there, maybe even enough to tip it over. I like the idea though Chris.

Hope all goes well, Ky.

for more control over the levers, in case the balloon plan doesn't work...

Chris

I'll be out all day Chris, the "big smoke" is calling. Talk later, Ky.

What BALLS you have.

Maybe the BALLS would do it! I wonder what else you would do about your cap turning into a glob of methane ice....

How do you hold the cap down while you rig the levers? The bigger the mechanical advantage, the smaller the range of the business end of the lever. The cap could not start out on the lever.

If you could configure the levers, you could start the balloon at the top and haul it down to it's point of maximum uplift.

the cap can be segmented, or have open vents until such time as everything is rigged. then closed when the lever force has been applied. As for the 'ice', I don't see an issue. To me, the ice is formed when the oil is flowing. the cap stops the flow, and subsequently the formation of the hydrates.

Chris

There are some 200,000 gallons/day passing through what it is left of the BOP of that well. I remember that I have seen a small business guy doing a "large" production. He was inflating balloons for birthdays. A balloon with not very thick walls can be brought to the source of oil spill. That reverse cup could "inflate" those balloons which, when having a certain size, are tied at the lower side and let to ascend, exactly the same way the oil is doing now. The difference is that the oil is better contained.

P.S. I have, already, applied for a patent. Mr BigMouth, patent attorney, told me that the price for patenting is a fraction, only, from what I can get from BP. I contacted several banks for a second mortgage.

the accoustic technology used by the Navy is already strictly limited due to the effects on Wright Whale and others. Ramping up the energy to a level required to have any effect would run the risk of deafening (essentially 'blinding' echolocation) countless whales. This is a fascinating technology, but it isn't a great idea to test it out and risk furtering the already substantial damage. b.b.b.

b.b.b.?? please expand.

I do agree with you regarding bio damage!! Haven't we already had much more than that and persisting for how long?? Nature has a remarkable ability to recover. We shouldn't have allowed BP to start in the first place without approved alternate strategies for contingency handling. The proposal is for Adaptive Noise Cancellation which ensures reduction (local annihilation) of destructive energy.

I think 'he who flies with elf's' is saying "bad, bad, bad"

The thing with noise cancellation is power equals the Watts 180⁰ out of phase. Or uses the exact equal and opposite energy.

The 'not realised' in ANC, is that it is specific in effect, at a specific distance, to the receiving sensor.

I.e. it cannot cancel all the noise for all the people in a room because the speed of sound is 'slow' and the phase shift needs to match each receiver (and can't over any distance)

Meaning; at any other than the perfect distance - the noise could be doubled.