The Design

[Patrick]

Tod,


If you hit something with ... lets call it a rudder for now ... it will drive the "fish" down, not up!!!


I have a question .... why do you guys think you know more than the commercial companies that have been making these units to earn a living?


Patrick

[jan]

Re: The Design

>Tod,


>If you hit something with ... lets call it a rudder for now ... it will drive the "fish" down, not up!!!


That is correct.


>I have a question .... why do you guys think you know more than the commercial companies that have been making these units to earn a living?


Personally I wish I had half the knowledge and 1/10th of the funding of the professionals.


But alas, have to do with a lot less.


Still, I do not think its bad to rethink a set idea or solution to a problem.


Anyone can make the fish he/she wants, but I like mine a bit different.


The standard fish is a proven model and will certainly work.


However.... hardly any control over it..


Any (water)speed change and the fish will change depth causing the sonar image to change.


An obstacle... fish flies straight in it.. (read that on several occasions already)


This idea will certainly help me to give my fish extra control


I would advice everyone who wants a working fish immediately to take the standard torpedo type.


That is a proven and easy to make model.


Regards Jan


>Patrick

[Tod Patterson (CT)]

Re: The Design

>Tod,


>If you hit something with ... lets call it a rudder for now ... it will drive the "fish" down, not up!!!


>I have a question .... why do you guys think you know more than the commercial companies that have been making these units to earn a living?


>Patrick


Patrick,


Your right, it will tend too tilt the head down, but that angle is limited by the tail, and the tow line is pulling it in our favor (up) so hopefully it will slide over. I don't know the electronics very well, but I do this type of concept, design and engineering for a living. That's not to say it's right, it just tries to address the issues. It is more difficult to make, but maybe easier to control. Let's call it autonomous I also have been looking into piezo transducers for a buoy release system, (still on the bench).


Tod

[Patrick Duffy]

Re: The Design

I should also mention that the "rudder" and "wings" will also result in further drag on the fish making it even more difficult to obtain desired depth.


As a group, we might be better off trying to figure out better electronics since we all seem to differ on the appropriate "fish" design.


I do not have an electronics or mechanical background and have to rely on common sense (I hope) and research. As far as the "fish" goes, my desire is to keep it simple, reliable, balanced, hydrodynamic and affordable.


Does anyone on the list have an electronics background ? Does anyone know if Sture will provide scehmatics of his design?


Have you all looked at the sidescan manufacturer web pages yet?


With a little luck, we'll begin machining some or most of the parts for the "fish" this evening.


I'll post on the progress and lessons learned.


Patrick


>>Tod,


>>If you hit something with ... lets call it a rudder for now ... it will drive the "fish" down, not up!!!


>That is correct.


>>I have a question .... why do you guys think you know more than the commercial companies that have been making these units to earn a living?


>Personally I wish I had half the knowledge and 1/10th of the funding of the professionals.


>But alas, have to do with a lot less.


>Still, I do not think its bad to rethink a set idea or solution to a problem.


>Anyone can make the fish he/she wants, but I like mine a bit different.


>The standard fish is a proven model and will certainly work.


>However.... hardly any control over it..


>Any (water)speed change and the fish will change depth causing the sonar image to change.


>An obstacle... fish flies straight in it.. (read that on several occasions already)


>This idea will certainly help me to give my fish extra control


>I would advice everyone who wants a working fish immediately to take the standard torpedo type.


>That is a proven and easy to make model.


>Regards Jan


>>Patrick

[Jan]

Re: The Design

>I should also mention that the "rudder" and "wings" will also result in further drag on the fish making it even more difficult to obtain desired depth.


Well, it actually controls the depth when its used with servo.


>As a group, we might be better off trying to figure out better electronics since we all seem to differ on the appropriate "fish" design.


Absolutely, The fish discussion is for those who want to experiment with fish shapes.


I might build both fishes, but would also like to start the sonar design as that will be the most difficult part.


>I do not have an electronics or mechanical background and have to rely on common sense (I hope) and research. As far as the "fish" goes, my desire is to keep it simple, reliable, balanced, hydrodynamic and affordable.


>Does anyone on the list have an electronics background ? Does anyone know if Sture will provide scehmatics of his design?


Sture will be back from holiday in august.


I have the feeling he might give us his design.


I have read somewhere that he is not difficult about that, so lets hope.


>Have you all looked at the sidescan manufacturer web pages yet?


Yes, but haven't found much more that the messages telling why their sonar is better


>With a little luck, we'll begin machining some or most of the parts for the "fish" this evening.


>I'll post on the progress and lessons learned.


>Patrick


>>>Tod,


>>>If you hit something with ... lets call it a rudder for now ... it will drive the "fish" down, not up!!!


>>That is correct.


>>>I have a question .... why do you guys think you know more than the commercial companies that have been making these units to earn a living?


>>Personally I wish I had half the knowledge and 1/10th of the funding of the professionals.


>>But alas, have to do with a lot less.


>>Still, I do not think its bad to rethink a set idea or solution to a problem.


>>Anyone can make the fish he/she wants, but I like mine a bit different.


>>The standard fish is a proven model and will certainly work.


>>However.... hardly any control over it..


>>Any (water)speed change and the fish will change depth causing the sonar image to change.


>>An obstacle... fish flies straight in it.. (read that on several occasions already)


>>This idea will certainly help me to give my fish extra control


>>I would advice everyone who wants a working fish immediately to take the standard torpedo type.


>>That is a proven and easy to make model.


>>Regards Jan


>>>Patrick

[Jan]

Re: The Design

>I should also mention that the "rudder" and "wings" will also result in further drag on the fish making it even more difficult to obtain desired depth.


Well, it actually controls the depth when its used with servo.


>As a group, we might be better off trying to figure out better electronics since we all seem to differ on the appropriate "fish" design.


Absolutely, The fish discussion is for those who want to experiment with fish shapes.


I might build both fishes, but would also like to start the sonar design as that will be the most difficult part.


>I do not have an electronics or mechanical background and have to rely on common sense (I hope) and research. As far as the "fish" goes, my desire is to keep it simple, reliable, balanced, hydrodynamic and affordable.


>Does anyone on the list have an electronics background ? Does anyone know if Sture will provide scehmatics of his design?


Sture will be back from holiday in august.


I have the feeling he might give us his design.


I have read somewhere that he is not difficult about that, so lets hope.


>Have you all looked at the sidescan manufacturer web pages yet?


Yes, but haven't found much more that the messages telling why their sonar is better


>With a little luck, we'll begin machining some or most of the parts for the "fish" this evening.


>I'll post on the progress and lessons learned.


>Patrick


>>>Tod,


>>>If you hit something with ... lets call it a rudder for now ... it will drive the "fish" down, not up!!!


>>That is correct.


>>>I have a question .... why do you guys think you know more than the commercial companies that have been making these units to earn a living?


>>Personally I wish I had half the knowledge and 1/10th of the funding of the professionals.


>>But alas, have to do with a lot less.


>>Still, I do not think its bad to rethink a set idea or solution to a problem.


>>Anyone can make the fish he/she wants, but I like mine a bit different.


>>The standard fish is a proven model and will certainly work.


>>However.... hardly any control over it..


>>Any (water)speed change and the fish will change depth causing the sonar image to change.


>>An obstacle... fish flies straight in it.. (read that on several occasions already)


>>This idea will certainly help me to give my fish extra control


>>I would advice everyone who wants a working fish immediately to take the standard torpedo type.


>>That is a proven and easy to make model.


>>Regards Jan


>>>Patrick

[Jan]

Re: The Design

Sorry about the double post.


Working from behind a firewall at the moment and thought that first posting did not work.


At home pages are updated immediately... here I have to do it manual


regards Jan