Artificial Floating Islands

University of Rhode Island
DigitalCommons@URI
Theses and Major Papers Marine Affairs
5-3-1983
Artificial Floating Islands: Cities of the Future

Earl A. Proetzel
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/ma_etds

Part of the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, and the Oceanography and
Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons
Recommended Citation
Proetzel, Earl A., "Artificial Floating Islands: Cities of the Future" (1983). Theses and Major Papers. Paper 145.
This Major Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Marine Affairs at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Theses and Major Papers by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLANDS
CITIES OF THE FUTURE
by
Earl A. Proetzel
GMA 652: Marine Affairs Seminar
Professor Gerald Krausse
May 3, 1983
CONTENTS
Page
LI ST OF FIGURES........................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES............................................ vii
INTRODUCTION. . • . • . . . • . . . . • . . • • • . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapter
1. HISTORICAL REVIEW OF OCEAN PLATFORMS................. 2
2. TYPES OF STRUCTURES.................................. 22
Columnar or Elevated Platforms............... 25
Advantages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 28
Disadvantages................................ 28
Semi-Submersible Platforms................... 30
Advantages and Disadvantages................. 32
Barge Platforms.............................. 35
Advantages................................... 44
Disadvantages. . • . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . • . 44
Tension-Leg Platform......................... 47
Advantages and Disadvantages................. 50
Deterioration Prevention and Construction

Materials for Artificial Floating Islands.... 51
Fouling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . 51
Corrosion. . . . . • • . . . . . • . • . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . •. . 52
Ice. . . . • . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • • 54
Construction Materials..... . . . . . . . • . . •. . . . . . . 54
3. APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLANDS.......... 64
Cities of the Future......................... 64
Power Generation............................. 84
11
CONTENTS
Page
Floating Coal-Fired Power Plant................... 84
Floating Nuclear Power Plant...................... 88
Mid-Ocean Basing Systems.......................... 103
4. ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLANDS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 110
Artificial Floating Islands as Ships

or Vessels........................................ 111
Artificial Floating Islands as Structures .•....... 118
Artificial Floating Islands as New States 122
Conclusion. . • • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • • . . . . . . . . . 123
S~Y. •••••••••• •• •••••• •••••••••• •• •••• ••••••••••••••• • 124
BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . • . . . . . • . . . . 125
APPENDIXES. . • • • . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . 128
iii
FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Floating Support for Drilling Devices....................... 3
2. Landing Stage for Vessels and Land Vehicles................. 4
3. Sea Station................................................. 6
4. Lake Washington Floating Bridge............................. 7
5. FLIP 10
6. FLIP 11
7. SEDCO-135................................................... 13
8. Planned Core Drilling Sites of MOHOLE....................... 15
9. MOHOLE Project.............................................. 16
10. MOHOLE Pro j ec t. • . . • . • . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . . • . • • . 18
11. DELOS Stable Ocean Platform................................. 19
12. Elevated Platform with Circular Cylindrical Legs............ 26
13. ARPA-Floating Platform...................................... 27
14. Bottle-Shaped Element....................................... 29
15. Wave Tank Test Model for Columnar Platform.................. 29
16. Semi-Submersible Configuration.............................. 31
17. 1/10 Scale Semi-Submersible Test Model...................... 33
18. 1/10 Scale Semi-Submersible Test Model...................... 34
19. Four Possible Barge Configurations.......................... 36
20. Flat Barge Configuration.................................... 37
21. Trimaran Barge Platform..................................... 39
22. Flippable Barge............................................. 40
23. Flippable Barge............................................. 41
24. Example of Possible Large Platform Configuration

for Flippable Barge......................................... 42
iv
FIGURES
Figure Page
25. Scripps-ARPA Flippable Barge Concept........................ 43
26. Barge Train Speed of Advance vs Sea State Condition......... 45
27. Barge Concept for Advanced Base Battle Group

Logistics Support........................................... 46
28. Tension-Leg Platform Design................................. 48
29. Method of Construction for the Hutton Tension-Leg Platform.. 49
30. Examples of Excessive Fouling............................... 53
31. Electrolytic Corrosion...................................... 55
32. Choice of Coatings for Different Zones of Offshore .

Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
33. Various Zones on Marine Structures Where Coatings are

USed as the Primary Means of Protection.................... 56
34. Diagram of Automated Cathodic Protection Control System.... 56
35. Composite Diagram of Ice Forces............................ 57
36. Three Traditional Methods of Building on Water............. 66
37. United States Pavilion, Montreal Expo...................... 68
38. Buckminster Fuller's Geodesic Dome Concept Over

New York City.............................................. 69
39. Buckminster Fuller Shows His Floating City to U.S.

Housing Officials.......................................... 70
40. Buckminster Fuller's Floating City......................... 71
41. Paola Soleri's Beehive Concept for a Floating City......... 76
42. 1/20 Scale Model of the Craven & Kikutake Floating

City Project............................................... 77
43. AQUAPOLIS.................................................. 79
44. Construction Sequence of AQUAPOLIS......................... 80
45. Basic Layout of AQUAPOLIS.................................. 81
v
FIGURES
Figure Page
46. Flow Diagram of Services Provided by AQUAPOLIS............. 85
47. Sewage Treatment Facilities for AQUAPOLIS.................. 86
48. Design Configuration for a Floating, Coal-Fired

Power Plant................................................ 89
49. Basic Layout for a Floating Nuclear Plant.................. 94
50. Floating Nuclear Plant Sited Off shore ....••................ 96
51. Floating Nuclear Plant Sited Nearshore ....•...•...•......•• 97
52. Floating Nuclear Plant Sited in Riverine ................... 98
53. The Blount Island Manufacturing Facility ....•..••..•...•.•. 101
54. Offshore Power Systems 900-ton Gantry Crane ...........•.... 102
55. MOBS Platform.............................................. 106
56. MOBS Platform.............................................. 107
57. MOBS Platform.............................................. 108
58. MOBS Platform.............................................. 109
vi
TABLES
Table Page
1. Appearance of the Sea at Various Wind Speeds................ 23
2. Effects of Ice on Design of Offshore Structures............. 58
3. Examples of Concrete Vessels Built in the Unit~d States..... 62
4. Design Parameters for AQUAPOLIS............................. 82
5. Estimated Delivered Coal Costs.............................. 90
6. Fixed Cost Differences of Sea and Land Power Plants......... 90
7. Operating Cost Differences, Excluding Fuel, of Sea

and Land Power Plants................. ••. •• •• •• .••• •• • . .• .•. 91
8. Capital Costs per KW........................................ 92
9. Total Costs of Power Generation, Excluding Fuel, in

Mills. KWH.. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 92
10. Comparison of Generating Plant Lead Times .•.....•.•.•....••. 100
vii
INTRODUCTION
The oceans are the last frontier. They belong to no one and
to everyone. All life began in them and they are our best hope
for the survival of life on land.
Today many densely populated coastal areas of the world are over-
congested and suffer from heavy industrial traffic and other
environment-burdening activities. One solution to this enormous
problem is the use of artificial floating islands. The recent
utilization of small-scale floating platforms by the petroleum
industry has proven that this all-weather concept is technically
feasible and economically realistic.
This report will investigate the feasibility of large-scale
artificial floating islands, to solve problems posed be over-
population and environment-burdening activities in coastal areas.
The investigation will focus on the historic, technical, utilizable
and legal aspects of artificial floating islands. Although
this report exemplifies artificial floating islands developed
for offshore cities, electrical power generation and basing for
the military, its content is applicable to any offshore floating
development.
1
Chapter 1
HISTORICAL REVIEW OF OCEAN PLATFORMS
This brief history of ocean platforms emphasizes the factors
significant to present and future applications of these platforms.
The first significant development was patented in the United States
on May 2, 1893 by Adoniram Fairchild. Figure (1) details Fairchild's
design of a floating support for drilling devices. Adoniram Fairchild
describes his tension-leg concept as follows: 1
This invention relates to improved means for supporting

drilling apparatus used for drilling holes in rock bottoms
of harbors or streams, that are to be deepened by blasting
the rock and subsequently removing the debris. Where charge
holes for blasting or otherwise shattering rocks at the
bottom of a body of water, are to be produced from the
surface of the water the operation is often rendered difficult,
as the floating support for the drilling apparatus is subjected
to the vertical fluctuation of water level due to swells or
wave force. 2
On March 23, 1920 Augustine Gaffney patented a semi-submersible
landing-stage for vessels and land-vehicles, see Figure (2).3
My invention is an improvement in landing stages for air

vessels, naval vessels, merchant vessels, gasoline and electric
driven cars of every character, containing power plant for
propelling landing stage, for submerging the landing stage,
for the hoisting of airplanes, patrol boats and cargoes,
operating means for the repair of aero vessels and naval
vessels, lighting, wireless telegraph, lon~ distance telephone,
search lights, winches, guns and the like.
1
See Chapter 2 for a complete description of the tension-leg
concept.
2 Adoniram Fairchild, "Floating Support for Drilling Devices,"
United States Patent, No. 496,729, May 2, 1893.
3
See Chapter 2 for a complete description of the semi-submersible
concept.
4
Augustine Gaffney, "Landing-Stage for Vessels and Land-Vehicles,"
United States Patent, No. 204,977, March 23, 1920.
2
i. FAI!CRILD. D.....
I. D. JPm~ ep 2 'P -
•,
,
·•·
~
\It
-~
,.\,)
~
~"''''''''''''''
<,
' .............
......, ..
ATTORNEYS.
FIGURE (l)
3
A. GAFFNEY. -:
LAID'I' STAGi rot YESSELS AI' UlllIMlfL
"P'LlCATlOIl flL[O O[e. .....,.
-1,334,445. Pat~Dted Var.23.1920.
, llilllUs-tIItU &.
• O· - p'1 1 i I I
~ ~:1111
i
,,~
II)
-
'~, ~,
-rl
~~
..
~
~:III
~II
~: tl
II
~illl,""'"
0\ ~
FIGURE (2)
4
A floating airfield or seadrome was patented by Edward R.
Armstrong on October 7, 1924. This invention utilized vertically
buoyant support members to stabilize the platform, see Figure (3).
Armstrong stated:
Commercial transportation by aeroplane over wide,

expanses of water, such as the Atlantic Ocean between
New York and London, is practical only by the use of
supply stations located at desirable intervals along the
route at which stations the fuel supply can be replenished
and the many details of operation of such an airway
properly conducted. It is the principle object of the
present invention to provide for the landing on and the
operation of aircraft from, such sea stations with
safety under all weather conditions. 5
Never a reality, Armstrong's concept of a deep buoyant platform
was successfully proven in 1961 with FLIP (FLoating Instrument Platform)
designed by Scripps Institution of Oceanography. FLIP will be
discussed in detail in this chapter.
Although not a new idea, numerous floating bridges were
constructed during the late 1930's and early 1940's. The most
noteworthy was the Lake Washington Floating Bridge in Seattle,
Washington, see Figure (4). This bridge was an important cog in
the overall future of floating platforms for two reasons, (1) the
use of reinforced-concrete, and (2) stability. The Lake Washington
Floating Bridge was the longest continuous bridge in the world
supported by 25 floating reinforced-concrete pontoons. A typical
pontoon had a width of 50 feet and a length of 350 feet, almost the
6
size of a football field. Reinforced-concrete was chosen for its
5
Edward R. Armstrong, "Sea Station", United States Patent, No.
1,511,153, October 7, 1924.
6
Charles F.A. Mann, "A Bridge That Floats", Scientific American
(New York: Munn, February, 1940), pp. 75-7.
5
.... '.It14. UII."
& ... MWiJIAON.
1M ""I.
I nae. .... '.
III' ...... "It 1
"1GORE ( 3 )
6
LAKI WASHINGTON FLOATING IIIDGE near Sea"le, Wash., Is .up·
"'ed by 24 cellular reinforced concrete pontoons. Ship. pall
tltrwgh on GPo;ng created by retrading two central sliding spans.
'_ITID 'IlUS U(T£RN,t., ,CIlCAL
FIGURE (4)
(From: Colliers Encyclopedia, vol. 4.,

New York: Macmillan, 1982, pp. 547.)
7
7
continuity, freedom from joints and its great mass and dead weight.
The most striking feature of this bridge was its great stability.
Even though the Lake Washington Floating Bridge was continuously
subjected to wind gusts of 65 miles per hour, 5 foot waves, and a
tidal range of 3 feet, not the slightest movement could be felt
according to Charles E. Andrew, principal engineer for the Washington
Toll Bridge Authority. He furhter stated:
The floating structure is very stable. The mass

existent because of the use of concrete is a most important
factor in aiding stability. Heavy trucks cause an almost
imperceptible movement in the bridge and many people
who ride over the bridge are not aware that it is a
floating bridge. I t has been subjected to a 65-mile wind
with only the slightest movement resulting therefrom. In
fact the structure, from all angles, has proven to be
satisfactory and ha~ fully met the expection of the engineers
responsible for it.
How this remarkable engineering feat paved the way for future
floating platforms will be shown later.
The 1950's and early 1960's marked the renaissance for floating
platforms. Initially drill rigs were placed on barges and then towed
to the drill site, see Appendix (1). These barges provided high
mobility but lacked the stability and station-keeping requirement~
for ocean drilling. What was needed was a stabilized platform that
minimized the influence of wind and water action.
In 1961-1962 under the direction of the Marine Physical Laboratory
7
A lighter floating object such as wood or steel would more readily
be tossed and put in motion by waves.
8
C.E. Andrew, "problems presented by the Lake Washington Floating
Bridge", American Concrete Institute, Journal Proceedings, Vol. 37,
January 1941, App. 253-268; discussion, pp. 268-1 thru 268-4.
8
of the University of California Scripps Institution of Oceanography
and funded by the United States Navy, a platform was constructed
utilizing deep draft in an attempt to minimize the effects of wind
and water. This Floating Instrument Platform or FLIP (see Figures 5
and 6)·. for shor t was designed as a super-stable, open-sea, free-
floating platform from which to conduct research in the field
of physical oceanography. The concept was taken from Armstrong's
Seadrome discussed earlier.
FLIP is essentially a long, slender tubular hull 20 feet in
diameter for almost half its length from the stern, and tapering
9
to a cylinder 12~ feet in the diameter as the bow is approached.
10
Overall length is 355 feet. FLIP was designed to be towed in a
horizontal attitude ballasted with water. When on station, controlled
flooding of tanks would cause the platform to raise her bow and drop
her stern until she floats in a vertical position.
While in the vertical mode FLIP proved to be an extremely stable
platform. During an operation in the Gulf of Alaska, with continuous
gale force winds and seas; FLIP's vertical motion was measured at less
than one-tenth wave height and heaved less than 3 inches. The
experience gained from FLIP has illustrated that Armstrong's Seadrome
concept, does indeed provide a stable platform.
By 1962, large semi-submersible drilling rigs had appeared, the
first being Blue Water Drilling Companies Rig number 1, see Appendix
9
Robert L. Trillo, ed., "Jane's Ocean Technology" (4th ed; New York:
Franklin Watts, 1979-1980), p. 376.
10
Ibid.
9
FLIP in its towing and venicst stutuae (SCflppS tnsutuuon of Oceanography)
Inboard profite of FLIP (Scripps /nslirulion of Oceanography)
FIGURE (5)
(From: Janes's Ocean Technology, 1979-1980, p. 376.)
10
FLIP (U.~. Navy)
FIGURE (6)
(From: Janes Ocean Technology, 1979-1980, p. 376.)
11
(1).11 During this time the capabilities of the platforms used by the
industry were mainly the result of experience. At first ocean and
weather conditions were unknown, and no one theory of prediction was
universally accepted. Nevertheless, platforms were designed, used and

12
accidents occurred. One of the most successful semi-submersible rigs
was built by Southeast Drilling Company (SEDCO). Unlike the
rectangular platform on the Blue Water rig, SEDCO utilized a triangular
design. Their first rig, SEDCO-135, had successfully weathered numerous
severe storms with 100-foot waves and demonstrated the inherent seaworthiness
of the design, see Figure (7), so much so that SEDCO has built seven
additional oil rigs of the same design from 1965-1969.
Up until the mid 1960's experience with floating platforms had
been limited to the oil industry. However, one of the most ambitious
drilling schemes ever undertaken outside the oil industry was Project
MOHOLE. MOHOLE derived its name from the Mohorovic Discontinuity or
Moho, which separates the Earth's crust from the mantle. The MOHOLE
Project was a national scientific project with the broad and
important objective of studying the Earth as a planet. From earlier
refraction studies it was determined that the crust of Earth is
thickest under the continents, averaging 21 miles, and under the

.
d eep ocean 1ts . much t hinner, averag1ng
crust 1S . 4 m1·1es. 13
Since the Earth's mantle was closest to the Earth's surface in
the deep ocean, drilling a hole to the mantle from a ship seemed the
11
See Chapter 2 for description.
12
Blue Water Drillings Companies Rig No. 1 capsized and sunk by
Hurricane Hilda in 1964. See Appendix (2).
13
Lester Del Rey, "The Mysterious Sea", (Philadelphia: Chilton,
1968), p , 183.
12
IlwriclL wincII-----------~
DerricII melt
lilnlr8blr. . -----~
EIIP- ..... ---~
2 Fuel-oil.......
1Illm~ ~
ConlroI_-----
0.......... - --1
IlaUry unit - - - - - _
1poIW .... --------~
IIiIer tube to 1 U t f _ - - - - - ~ Drill w.Wr
Anl:hor. . . . . rDs. _ c_-,-_ SUw.ter b1111Ml .
Anl:horchains-
(3 .nthors flam - - - - - - - - - - - - t - - - / . ' t
.-ch IaatJn&)
- - - - - - - - - - - - G u i c l e wires
f - - - - - - - - - - - - w.IIMM _ b l y
FIGURE (7): SEDCO-135
(From: John F. Brahtz, Ocean Engineering,

New York: John Wiley, 1968, pp. 372.)
13
most logical approach to the problem. Thus, Project MOHOLE was born.
Drilling was to have been done near Hawaii, see Figure (8), in
a depth of water of about 14,000 feet and to have bored through 19,000
feet of oceanic crust to reach the Moho. 14,15 For such a monumental
drilling operation, stability was the key factor. The basic
configuration of the MOHOLE platform is shown in Figure (9). The
platform consisted of three decks, 279 feet long and 234 feet wide,
floating on two submersible submarine hulls, each 390 feet long and
35 feet in diameter. 16,17 Six columns, each 88 feet long and 31 feet
in diameter support the platforms on the submarine hulls creating
minimal surface area for mobility. Since it was anticipated that
drilling would continue for at least three years, MOHOLE's design
criteria for survival were quite stringent. These criteria called
for MOHOLE to survive in winds of 140 knots with 200-knot gusts and
18
waves 100 feet high.
MOHOLE was designed to be held on station by a dynamic position-
keeping system. Six 750-horsepower positioning motors plus the
main propulsion system were to be integrated with a sonar and a radar
position-locating system to keep MOHOLE within a circle of 500-foot
14
Richard E. Munskem, "Progress on MOHOLE", Undersea Technology.
(Arlington: Compass, December, 1963), pp. 5, 16-7.
15
Fred N. Spiess, "Vehicle and Mobile Structures", Ocean Engineering,
ed. John F. Brahtz (New York: John Wiley, 1968), pp. 373.
16
Gordon G. Lilly, "The MOHOLE Project", The Military Engineer,
(July-August, 1965), pp. 234-35.
17
Warren E. Yasso, "Oceanography", (New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, 1965), pp. 70-1.
18
Ibid.
14
-----:::::::;I'--------c:::M-----r-----300N
site2 23°N,I48°W
Moho 9450 m
lite 1
water 5180 m
Kauai. 25,uu-.+d--
Oahu. I
•
Lanai-':- Maui
Hawaii
FIGURE (8): Planned core drilling sites of MOHOLE.
(From: McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science

and Technology, vol. 8, New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1982, pp. 650.)
15
I,
",4!"I
~.,.~.
.',- '. -.'it' ,!.~'f .~~
FIGURE (9): MOHOLE project.
(From: John F. Brahtz, Ocean Engineering,

New York: John Wiley, 1968, pp. 373.)
16
. 19
ra d 1US. In addition to extremely precise station-keeping ability,
MORaLE was designed to be self-propelled with a maximum speed of
10 knots, see Figure (10).
Project MORaLE never got off the drawing board having been
20,21
abandoned by Congress in 1966 for insufficient funds. Although
never a reality, all required equipment, machinery, and instrumentation
had been designed, and some of it had been fabricated. Project MOROLE
was probably the single greatest achievement in stable floating platforms
and a stepping stone for future platforms. "The 50,000 engineering
man-hours used in developing the dynamic positioning system for
Project MORaLE were not wasted.,,22 In 1967 the Western Development
Laboratories division of Philco-Ford Corporation adapted the MORaLE
concept to, "design stable, station-keeping ocean platforms for use
as mobile range tracking stations and other applications.,,23
The DELOS concept was a semi-submersible, column-stabilized
steady ocean platform similar to MORaLE, see Figure (11). Project
manager William Richards stated:
Ships produce at best a shaky platform for antennas.

To keep from rolling, a ship must go into the waves, often
in a direction in whi~h the way your antennas are strung out
19
Warren E. Yasso, "Oceanography", (New York: Rolt, Rinehart and
Winston, 1965), pp. 70-1.
20
Arlen J. Large, "MORaLE Helu", The Wall Street Journal,
(January 19, 1967, pp. 12, col. 4.)
21
"MORaLE: The Project That Went Awry (III)", Science, vol. 143,
(January 24, 1964), pp. 115-7, 334-7.
22
Robert W. Niblock, "Oil Companies To Use MORaLE Technology",
Technology Week, (April 17, 1967), pp. 24.
23
Robert Lindsey, "Project MORaLE Fallout: Sea-Going Tracking
Stations", Aerospace Technology, (May 6, 1965), pp. 34-5.
17
Sub·surface
sonar (4)
FIGURE (10): The site for Project MOHOLE lies about 100
miles north of Maui in the Hawaiian Islands;
an area where explosion soundings have shown
that the mantle rises to within three miles
of the ocean floor, beneath two and a half
miles of water.
(From: Warren E. Yasso, Oceanography,

New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
1965, pp. 71.)
18
F -t ". -. ' "
//'
._CL _ ..Ch..
t;'i15~~
t, ~ j-:~/~"
.....
\.0
DElOS Stable Ocean Plalform

An advanced generation of a sea-mobile support plad'orm. In , 1Ie1l5.Shown here DELOS ill ronfigUled a. a .teldy lIea-bor.
ar....il.
DELOS operate. I I a catamaran; on sration. the twin tracking station desitlned to support misaile and .ace procra-..
..... _ Altm.qred to provide inherenl steadine"" even in hWh
FIGURE (11)
(From: Stewart B. Ne1son# Oceanographic Ships, Washington:

U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971, pp. 219.)
· is not optimum. Even with inertial navigation and ship
stabilizing devices, you don't have satisfactory navigation
accuracy and you still have a lot of pitch and roll, causing
the problem called "smear", degraded resolution of position-
fixing instrumentation. Recalling that a stable platform
had been developed in the abortive Project MOHOLE the effort
to drill deep into the Earth's mantle, we wondered if it
might provide the "floating island" technique we wanted. 24
DELOS was designed to survive winds up to 150 miles per hour and
waves towering to 100 feet, and, have the accuracy required to

25
track space objects to within 200 feet.
Several major oil'companies, the United States Air Force and Navy,
invisioned numerous applications of the DELOS concept to include:
(1) Offshore oil work; it can provide guidance for

re-entering the riser into the top of the blow-out preventer
stack, or
(2) For re-entering the blow-out preventer into the

connector on the main base. 26
(3) A platform for read-out stations of the Air Force

global Satellite Control Facility. Advantages include improved
reception of some kinds of data: wide ranging oceanic mobility
to meet certain mission requirements; and the prospect of
locating read-out stations in areas where political conditions
do not permit land stations or where, perhaps in the future,
a political situation forces closing of stations on foreign
soil.
(4) High speed mobility of the "floating island" has a

potential role in certain U.S. intelligence efforts. During
Soviet ICBM tests, for example, a DELOS-like platform could
be moved to almost any area where over-ocean flight tests
24
Robert Lindsey, "Project MOHOLE Fallout: Sea-Going Tracking
Stations", Aerospace Technology, (May 6, 1965), pp. 34-5.
25
"DELOS Mobile Instrumental Steady Sea Station", Undersea Technology,
(July, 1968), pp. 16.
26
Robert W. Niblock, "Oil Companies To Use MOHOLE Technology",
Technology Week, (April 17, 1967), pp. 24.
20
were tQ be conducted. Signature data and performance of
Soviet re-entry vehicle technology could be collected
virtually anywhere in the oceans.
(5) Other applications include use as a base for anti-

submarine warfare operations; monitoring of ocean-bottom
seismic and nuclear test observation and missile impact
location sensors; as a "mother ship" during recovery
attempts of objects lost in the oceans; as a platform
for launching weapons; and a variet of proposed industrial
2
and scientific maritime operations. 7
Project MOHOLE and DELOS were indeed very similar. So much so that,
DELOS was also abandoned for insufficient funds in 1968.
This has been a brief history of the early beginnings of
artificial floating islands. Although the future of these platforms
may not appear promising, much has indeed been accomplished. The
technology has been refined over the last 100 years and it's
only a matter of time before artificial floating islands will arrive.
Before looking into some future applications of artificial floating
islands, lets examine the different types of structures presently
available for artificial floating islands.
27
Robert Lindsey, "Project MOHOLE Fallout: Sea-Going Tracking
Stations", Aerospace Technology, (May 6, 1965), pp. 35.
21
CHAPTER 2
TYPES OF STRUCTURES
Before discussing the possible applications of artificial floating
islands, a review of various platform concepts is required.
The primary factors one has to deal with in the design of marine
structures are those associated with winds, waves, tides, and currents.
In addition, biological activities such as fouling and boring
organisms must be considered for certain structures, as must certain

28
chemical (corrosion), electrolytes, and thermal (ice expansion) phenomena.
The effects of wind, waves, tides and current will be discussed
here and the effects of biological chemical and other activities will
be dealt with later.
Wind and waves are directly related and t.hez-ef ore wsd.Ll.obe
deliberated together. Waves on the surface of the sea are caused
principally by wind. In fact, wind speed at sea can be estimated from
wave conditions, see Table (1).
The amount of energy in even a moderate wave is overwhelming.
A four-foot wave striking a coast expends more than 35,000 horsepower
per mile of beach, and for each 56 miles of coast, the energy expended
29
equals the power generated at Hoover Dam. Keeping this in mind,
the effect of wind and waves can have disastrous effects on floating
platforms. For the North Sea oil rigs to frequently experience 30-50
foot seas and 100 mile per hour winds is not uncommon. In the overall
28
Robert L. Wiegel, Oceanographical Engineering, (Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall, 1964), pp. 442.
29
Nathaniel Bowditch, American Practical Navigation, (Washington:
Defense Mapping Agency Hydrographic Center, 1977), pp. 791.
22
IEAU· WIND
'ORT SPEED
HUM· (ldlometers SEAMAN'S
IER· per hour) TERM EFFECTS OBSERVED AT SEA
0 under 1 Calm sea Uke a mirror
1 1-5 Ught air RIpples with appearance of ecaJes; no
foam crests
2 6-11 Ught breeze Small wavelets; crests of glassy
appearance, not breaking
3 12-19 Gentle Large wavelets; crests begin to break;
breeze IC8tt8f'ed whitecaps
4 20-28 Moderate Small waves. becOming longer;
breeze numerous whitecaps
5 29-38 Fresh Moderate waves, taking longer form;
breeze many whitecaps: some spray
6 39-49 Strong Larger waves forming; whitecaps
breeze everywhere; more spray
7 ~1 Moderate Sea heaps up; white foam from
gale breaking waves begins to be blown In
streaks
8 62-74 Fresh gale Moderately high waves of greater
length; edges of crests begin to break
into spindrtft; foam is blown in well·
marited streaks
9 75-88 Strong gale High waves; sea begins to roll; dense
streaks of foam; spray may reduce
visibility
10 89-102 Whole gale VefYhigh waves with overhanging
crests; sea takes white appearance
81 foam is blown In very dense
streal<8; rolling is heavy and Yialbility
reduced
11 103-117 Storm Exceptionally high waves; 18a covered
with whit..toam patches; visibility still
more reduced
12 118-133
13 134-149
14 Hurricane Air filled with foam; sea completely
1S(H66
15 white with driving spray; visibility
167-183
16 greatly reduced
184-201
17 202-220
-Beau/uri numbtTs. still used to indicate approximate wind speed, were devised
in 1806 by the English admiral Sir Francis Beaufort, based on the amount of sail a
fully rigg~d warship of his day could carry in a wind of a given strength. Modifi~d
from U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office, 1958. A..mcan PracticAl Naviptor (Bowditch),
rev. ed., H.O. Pub!. No.9, Washington. D.C., p. 1069.
Table (1): Appearance of the Sea at Various Wind Speeds.
23
design of floating platforms, it is therefore imperative that the
effects of wind and waves be considered. If not, disastrous results
have and will occur, see Appendix (2).
The tidal phenomenon is the periodic motion of the waters of the
sea due to differences in the attractive forces of various celestial
bodies. The effect of tides can be extremely important to floating
platforms, specifically to the mooring systems employed by these
floating structures located near coastal waters. The reason being, the
range of tide can be quite dramatic is some parts of the world. For
example, the tidal range in some parts of the Bay of Fundy can change
as much as 40 feet in a period of six hours. This could obviously create
problems if consideration had not been given to the effect of tides
in the overall design of floating platforms located in these areas.
Finally, the effects of current must be considered in the design
of floating structures. There are several main types of currents in the
ocean: the general oceanic currents, the tidal currents, and the
wind-induced surface currents. Current velocities vary from place
to place. Measurements range from zero to over 10 knots depending
on location and time of year. No matter what the type of current,
their effects must be considered in the design of floating platforms.
Specifically, mooring and position-keeping systems, to be effective,
must be designed to compensate for the effects of current.
Platforms can be divided into four different types: columnar or
elevated, semi-submersible, barge and tension-leg. Each concept
will be discussed in length as well as their advantages/disadvantages,
24
and operational/constructional deficiencies.
COLUMNAR OR ELEVATED PLATFORMS

This concept is an extension to large platforms of the proven
principles embodied in the very successful ocean platform FLIP. This
idea is not new. Thinking back to Chapter 1, Armstrong patented the
concept for a floating airport in 1924. Columnar platforms are designed
to employ many vertical buoyant elements to support the work surface,
see Figure (12). These vertical elements or columns reach far down
into deep water for buoyant support and exceptional stability.
The columnar platform concept has three major variations. In
the first, small platform or deck modules ( about 50-60 feet square),
and column sections (20-30 feet in diameter and 50 feet long), are
towed to the operating site. Once on location, the deck and column
modules are jointed together to form the complete platform, see
Figure (13). The objective of this design is to keep the elements
small enough so that they can be fabricated at a comparatively
small industrial establishment, instead of depending on large shipyard
facilities.
The second variation is basically identical to the first, except
on a larger scale. The deck sections are now about 200 feet square, and,
the column sections are 300 feet long. The columnar sections are
placed only at the corner of each deck section, and, where two or four
sections come together, they share the support of a single column at that
point. The idea behind this variation is to reduce the number of
module connection points, and hopefully lessen assembly time.
25
»>: ~-"~o...-."-'"
<, -, v.
'.
" ""
• j! ,,- _. !
. I ,. ......_.
~ ~
r
¥~-~ -~~~~
--
-
- ~ II : ....
-'" .- -"
-:;;:;: -;; «::;;
~~':'C~_ ~_ ~.-.--~ ,
- ..
_.,.-_------_.-
---_ --
•• __ r
..<., --
if;:- -i-::;.
N
0'\
1...
• .'/";1
itwa
.,... ',. 'i• • •
.~{
FIGURE (12): Elevated platform with circular cylindrical legs.
(From: Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory

Port Hueneme, California)
e -D I I r -1 r-- I. Join sections, while floating.
A. Winch together.
B. Quick connect.
C. Pin, bolt or weld.
ti) 1..,-11 I L-J i ,I i" \;) J- II. Install leg sections.
III. Flood legs, lower, secure.

(j) ~ i I, i I I i ,I i II
N
......
('i) I IV. Ballast-up rig by pumping.
V. Repeat 3 & 4 to give final configuration.

(i) r
FIGURE (13): ARPA-Floating Platform (Assembly Procedure)

The last configuration of columnar platform utilizes bottle-
shaped floating elements, see Figure (14). In this design, the neck
of the bottle provides a smaller surface area in contact with surface
water. This reduced surface area lessens the effects of wave and current
action and increases the overall stability of the platform.
Advantages
The advantages of a hydro-dynamically stable columnar platform
are many. Probably the most important advantage is stability. A
columnar platform can be designed to have a minimum heave, pitch, and
roll response for practically any sea condition. Pilot tests conducted
in a wave tank indicate that a 1000 foot by 4000 foot columnar platform
would provide sufficient stability for handling large, heavily laden
cargo aircraft, such as the C-130, see Figure (15). Another advantage
of a columnar platform is its apparently favorable drift response.
By using the bottle-leg configuration and limiting the deck thickness,
wave tank studies have revealed that this type of platform may actually
30
remain stationary under moderate sea conditions. Finally, the
versatility of the columnar platform is enormous. Its inherent
stability makes this platform ideal for airports, urban expansion,
industrial facilities or power generation.
Disadvantages
The columnar platform design has two basic disadvantages. First,
since its stability is depended on long-b~oyant vertical legs, the
platform has an average draft of 300-400 feet. This places a restriction
30
Moderate sea conditions being 3-4 foot seas and 10-15 mph winds.
28
N
\0
FIGURE (15): Wave tank test model for

columnar platform.
FIGURE (14): Bottle-shaped element

on columnar platforms in that they must be located at sites having
a water depth greater than 300-400 feet. The second disadvantage
is high-towing drag and lack of mobility. The design of columnar
or elevated platforms does not include the use of internal main
propulsion and, if these platforms are to be moved, they must be
towed by external means. Preliminary calculations have indicated
that the force required to move a 1000 foot by 4000 foot platform
with a 300 foot draft is enormous. Therefore, site selection is
extremely important. A permanent location must be chosen, with the
idea in mind, that once these platforms are constructed they are not
going to be moved great distances unless disassembled.
SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE PLATFORMS
The second contender for future artificial floating islands is
the semi-submersible concept. Early examples of this concept, were
the landing stage for vessels and land vehicles patented by Augustine
"
Gaff ney and Projects MOROLE an d DELOS. 31 A semi-submerS1"bl e i s a
buoyant platform with most of the buoyancy coming from the submerged
hulls. The basic configuration consists of a lower hull formed of
tubular members for buoyancy, vertical support columns attached to
the lower hull and the deck, see Figure (16).
Mobility and stability are inversely proportional on semi-submersible
platforms. To achieve mobility the self-propelled platform rides high
out of the water in a shallow draft condition, thus, reducing hydrodynamic
31
See Chapter 1.
30
t t
w
....
~ ~
a. Concrete/Steel Candidate #7 b. Concrete Candidate #25
J O-J1 c. MOHOLE
,
o ,
100' 200' ,
Scale: 1" = 200'
FIGURE (16): Semi-submersible configurations.
(From: Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory,

drag to a minimum. In this shallow draft condition, stability
is at a minimum, being greatly influenced by the effects of wave
and wind action. Once on station however, increased stability is
obtained by ballasting to a deep-draft mode, sacrificing mobility.
A one-tenth scale twin-hull semi-submersible platform was
designed by the Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory in 1973 to evaluate
stability and construction techniques, see Figures (17) and (18).
After nine months of submergence and vigorous testing, the test model
was evaluated as a complete success. D.A. Davis a technical engineer
for the project stated:
(1) A preliminary analysis of a mobile, semi-submersible

platform indicates that the concept is feasible, provided that:
a. A comparatively lightweight deck is used.

b. An underneath deck clearance of 30 to 40 feet
above mean water surface is acceptable.
c. Large diameter 'columns and hulls (up to 60 feet
in outside diameter) having a wall thickness
not exceeding 2 feet are acceptable from
considerations of formability and strength.
(2) It is feasible to construct a full-scale platform

using precast concrete elements and post-tension techniques.
(3) Power required for propulsion at 15 knots, for all

configurations studied lies in the range of 8,700 to
12,700 shp.
(4) Cost for an acceptable, all-concrete platform

having deck plan dimensions of 200 feet by 230 feet is
estimated to be around 15 million dollars. 32
Advantages and Disadvantages
The primary advantage of the semi-submersible concept is that it's
32
D.A. Davis, The Concrete Semi-Submersible Platform, (Port Hueneme:
Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, 1973), pp. 32.
32
.. j Main Deck 8eams
Open Floor Grating
}-
d
t -
! j
42%"
~
Column Top
Plate Ring
,...
w
1- ,. . '\.~~~., ,,"I ,", F.J~_""- .,.
w I 8allastiTank •
J
1" 0 rod
L 4 U'-0" ~ 32'-Q"
HIIf s.ction - Exwlor Half s.ction through

Cl Hull
FIGURE (17): 1/10 scale semi-submersible test model.

..
-~ .:.., .:....
;\
i
l
·1 "lf~(-,
•j
.At-.....-.-t'. '\ __
. -.
\H, ~
_. l'
<: .; ..... r!
." ~ .. ~
,~ -- ~
, - I
"'-T\r
w
.po
• .
I"""""~
....
;.
..~~ , - . . .,~
.,,,J:'J. ' i ......·'.. '.
}~;:«;~~
i:r~ .......:'::: ".~ ~ ~ <: ,'.

~:-,~.~,",
.;;," ..- '~'.~:::or
... . ,."
. . .'':.>
. .-"..
..~~~. .:.::::,;;:
.. :-.:~.~
S, """ "",
....::
'
~~ 'r'" ._
-~. -~"~';';::'
~ ~~ . -~ ;- .. ~:
.:::.':::.:~~
FIGURE (18): 1/10 scale semi~submersible test model.

more than an idea or model, it is a reality. Medium size semi-submersible
platforms have been utilized by the offshore oil industry as
exploration, development, and work platforms for the past 15 years.
The design has been refined along the way and its enormous success
is a matter of record. Unlike the columnar platform designed strictly
for max±mum stability, the semi-submersible platform is a compromise.
Semi-submersibles are inherently less stable than deep buoyant platforms
but, more so than conventional ships. On the other hand, they have
greater mobility when compared to elevated platforms but, less than
conventional ships. Because of this compromise, the applications for
a semi-submersible platform are on a smaller scale in relation to
columnar platforms. Applications include, (1) VSTOL and helicopter
basing for the military or coastal urban areas, (2) oceanographic
research, (3) petroleum tank storage and, (4) submarine rescue/recovery.
BARGE PLATFORMS
The barge probability dates back to prehistoric times when man
lashed logs together and floated down a waterway. Several thousand
years later, the barge is now being considered for large offshore
floating platforms. Figure (19) illustrates four possible barge
configurations.
The first, oldest and simplest configuration geometrically is a
flat-sided, flat-bottom hull having the distinction of offering the
lowest draft to displacement ratio, see Figure (20). An offspring

of the first, the catamaran and trimaran hulls offer greater structural
resistance to sagging and hogging stresses, but do have a greater
35
FLAT HULL
CATAMARAN
TRIMARAN
C___~
(-Zl------~)
-7
FLIPPABLE
FIGURE (19): Four possible barge configurations.
36
W
'-I
FIGURE (20): Flat Barge Configuration.
(From: Naval Facilities Engineering Command,

Alexandria, Virginia)
draft than a flat hull configuration, see Figure (21). Probably the
most innovative and versatile design is the flippable-barge concept.
The concept utilizes a major module of the sort shown in Figures
(22) and (23). The craft can operate in either a horizontal or vertical
mode, and can carry a deck load consisting of a number of FLIP-like
columns which would be the large platform supporting elements.
These would be loaded on deck in port, and the entire rig (looking
like a conventional large seagoing barge with deckload) would be towed
to the assembly area. Once on station, the major module would flip
with its deck load still attached and then, once in the vertical, would
release the individual columns to be pulled away one by one. The
legs and the major module would be coupled into a single rigid structure
which would then be mated to other similar subgroups to form the
entire platform, see Figure (24).
An offspring of the flippable-barge just described was designed
by Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and Scripps Institute
of Oceanography in 1970. The Scripps-ARPA design comprised a floating
platform made up at sea from two-legged modules. Each module
consisted of a pair of FLIP-like legs rigidly connected to each other
and supporting a superstructure platform on a trunnion so that it remains
essentially level as the legs are changed from the horizontal to the
vertical attitude, see Figure (25). The major difference between
the original flippable-barge design and the Scripps-ARPA design, was
reduced surface area in the later design. This reduced surface area
would reduce the effects of wind and wave action, and therefore, increase
38
~:
'"
-~u
'--:~". .
~
"'
-:..,,--
.
.... ~,
<lI'
,.
--":.
;;..
"
~
"
,
VJ
\0 ..•/
"
FIGURE (21): Trimaran Barge platform.

,.
~ _~ J;--- A l5"'"""'----)
I
3 .
Flipping Seq~ence
1. Horizontal Node, Payload (A) in place.

J. partially flipped, with payload as A
integr~l part of vehicle.
~
3. Vertical :lode, payload still in
o tr~nsit/flip position.
4. Vertical ;·lode, pa}'load being lowered
to appropriate work position.
FIGURE (22'): Flippable Barge.
(From: Naval Civil ENgineering Laboratory,

I
VERT!C,l\L ,.
.-' ~
: A<l""Y_~"
J ...
"
...... ~~
!
NiOD£: ~~~~, SURFACE VVOIlK BARGE
(7 ~
.f.!;""C.,
i
.;...... /~ T- . '. ,.~
-; __.;
.,,:, '-
', _
_/l1t~~~{:';'"';:,';~t'
~~~~~lr\: • ~'I' . -- --.-
-:~ I;~'l':.~ i~~" ~~;-
. . __ I :. " -.'-: - .- .... .. -.--
...:.;
_.. tL I
' .... .._..-' '-
'.11. .. •.•' .•..• ~' - -
I .
:'1
..
. -.. ~._-~
••., __ . ..
. .__ \. ' 11 t ..· ---- --:'~_.~-'. ~~:7 ~
i ~~-::_~~'( ;;V ~c-;-~; <;..

·f ';-1 ••..•
.•__ ":" I':,:", .:: Ii":" r:,~ ::.:

1'-.1· '(:~ '; ..'
":'-.tt::.;(t, :=.:.1, '-~:!~~'F::-
_.
1:-
I.
Ii
.•
~:,.....
",
...... .;:
.••.. , :
~
~ -.._ "~''''
I ~::~~-. ~~<'<~~::;': . / : - ~
...... ~''''-.
~'"''.~
I ! r!:Y/ ~~
.
- •• ,.-::1<. --:...·:.l.~... _ " ,
F· I!·'
I:
I. , , ~ -::''--''''',
'-
~:, .. ~.-::-~..".~...~~
' •• ""' ~.::o-.... - :
. :•••••,:
~
.... ". ~ .~
I J' • '
I : J I' '.
~....,
,J::-
.....
I' :: l
f
,"
II!
lo
i
.1
J~
•
. ~~o-_~':.,~~~",:,,:~,
,~",
"~='~:!::-:,c~.: ~..~
_·_'-S,.~ ~ ,
; i ,
!: Li ,
I'I lit~ "1J /~
-~:~~
"
f "
/)),
.~~~ It~/·./
JL/
;,,---------
\ J ,.,0" I
~
~
\\\//; I
FIGURE (23): Flippable Barge.

"-.
//
~-'~,
. ~~,<- ,~
'" /~--s~
/'
~
.~/ -.
./
~.'
,~.,
~v~,}
./
.r:-
N
\4~~'
"
'","cJ
FIGURE (24): Example of possible Large Platform Configuration for fllppablQ barq••
l, Port Hueneme, California)
~_/
FIGURE (25); Scripps-ARPA Flippable Barge Concept.

43
the overall stability of the platform.
Advantages
Like the semi-submersible platform, there is a long and successful
record established in the construction of ocean going barges. By present
engineering standards a 1000 foot by 4000 foot barge is feasible. As
opposed to elevated and semi-submersible platforms, barge platforms have
a shallow draft. This reduced draft enhances utilization of the barge
platform in coastal areas for urban expansion or floating airports.
The hydrodynamic drag is also comparatively low. Reduction in drag
is extremely important if the platform must be moved rapidly, or for
long distances, and for this reason the United States Navy is
considering the use of barge trains for an advanced base battle group
logistic support unit, see Figures (26) and (27). Finally, the
barge hull can be used for storing and housing personnel and equipment,
including power plants and propulsion systems.
Disadvantages
Shallow draft, in addition to being an advantage is also a
disadvantage. With the exception of the flippable-barge, all other
configurations have their buoyant support at or near the water surface.
Keeping this in mind, barge platforms are more susceptible to wave
induced motion than elevated or semi-submersible platforms.
Generally, catamaran or trimaran type barges have greater stability
when compared to flat barges, due to their greater draft and decreased
water plane area. The flippable-barge configuration unquestionably
44
G:::: ~=-="::::J.-. C:C;Y=-C?G2 ba c<> .0,
16 -
14 -
0-0",
12- 0- '"
-.
~
1TI
SPEED OF AIlIIAHCE 10-
8 - e
6 -
4 e
o .J.L-
,
--y
,
..... ..... -.
•
~ - -
, ,
1 2 ) 4
SEA STATE CONDITION
~
• 1
•
FIGURE (26): Barge Train Speed of Advance vs Sea State Condition.
(From: Science, Engineering and Analysis, Inc., Oxnard, California)

---
~"
~.
.....
.p-
O'
-~
"
FIGURE (27): Barge Concept for Advanced Base Battle Group Logistics Support.
(From: Science, Engineering and Analysis, Inc., Oxnard, California)

has the greatest stability, but like the semi-submersible, mobility is
reduced due to greater draft.
TENSION-LEG PLATFORM
This concept is a variation of the semi-submersible platform.
It utilizes the principle of tensioning a buoyant platform into the
water with anchors and cables (patented by A. Fairchild in 1893, see
Chapter 1).
Tension-leg platforms have two main structural elements:

a floating hull similar to a semi-submersible drilling
rig but much larger and an array of highly tensioned
vertical tethers at each corner. The tethers fashioned
out of high-tensile-strength steel tubes, pull the floating
hull down so far that they never go slack even in the trough
of the maximum wave estimated to come once every 100
years. Although the tether system allows a degree of
lateral motion, it prevents the heave, or vertical
motion, associated with free-floating craft such as
drilling vessels. 33
Figure (28) illustrates the tension-leg platform. The superior
stability of this platform is due to several factors. These include:
(1). Reduction of the waterplane area.
(2). Buoyant pontoons beneath the water surface.

·
(3) . TenS10n anc h or 1·1nes. 34
"The Hutton platform, being developed and built by Conocco, Inc.,
for the British sector of the North Sea, is the First commercial
tension-leg platform.,,35 Figure (29) details the method of construction
33
Fred S. Ellers, "Advanced Offshore Oil Platforms", Scientific
American, vol. 246, April 1982, pp. 43.
34
Robert R. Nunn, "New Concepts for Deep Water Production'~ Ocean
Industry, vol. 3, no. 9, September 1968, pp. 50.
35
47
.1
i' /1/IlL
t, ANCHOR PILINGS
PC /1' (EIGHT AT EACH CORNER)
II I'
PIGURE (28): Tension-Leg Platform De.ign.
(From: Scientific American, April 1982, pp. 44)
48
,., 1982 1113 HUT1'ON
FIGURE (29): Method of Construction for the Hutton Tension-Leg Platform.
(From: Scientific American, April 1982, pp. 44)

and emplacement for the Hutton platform. Very simply, the hull is
constructed in a drydock and floated into deep water. After being
partially submerged, the superstructure will be towed overhead and
attached to the hull. Finally, the complete platform will be towed
to the selected site and tethered to its prepared foundations.
Initial oil production for the Hutton platform is scheduled for
early 1984.
Advantages and Disadvantages
The tension-leg platform has several noteworthy advantages.
Foremost is its ability to remain on station. The tensioned vertical
tether will keep the platform inside a circle with a radius of 10% of
the water depth even when subjected to a combination of 85 mph winds

36
and 2 knot currents. This concept also has the distinct capability
of being insensitive to water depth. In other words, as water depth
increases, the tethers need only be lengthened while the basic
configuration remains unchanged. From an economic perspective the
tension-leg platform is advantageous. Since one basic design can be
utilized over a wide range of water depths, it seems to hold great
" f or stan d ar d"lzatlon.

promlse • 37
Disadvantages of the tension-leg platform are twofold. First
construction and maintenance costs are extremely high. The tension-leg
platform design is inherently complex and capital intensive. In
addition, a requirement for periodic maintenance and inspection of the
36
Robert R. Nunn, "New Concepts for Deep Water Production", Ocean
Industry, vol. 3, no. 9, September 1968, pp. 50.
37
50
anchoring system increases the overall operating cost. The second
drawback of the tension-leg platform is its having to be buoyant
under all weather conditions. This stipulation limits the maximum
deck-ilioad capacity of the platform.
DETERIORATION PREVENTION
AAD
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS FOR ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLAADS
The ocean environment presents a unique challenge to the marine
engineer in terms of proper selection of materials for a given floating
structure. The effects of winds, waves, tides and currents on marine
structures were discussed at the beginning of this chapter. This
section will continue that discussion dealing specifically with
fouling, corrosion, and the effects of ice, and how these factors
determine the construction materials required for marine structures.
FOULING
Fouling refers to the accumulation of various plant growths and
animal organisms on any solid object in the water. The process begins
when immersed or partially immersed surfaces become coated with a
film of organic matter containing bacterial microcolonies and their
metabolic products. Many organisms colonize where this film has
accumulated; some seeking a firm surface on which to attach themselves
and, still others live by consuming the film. Depending upon the
construction materials and location chosen for a floating platform,
the effects of fouling could be catastrophic if not considered in
51
design, see Figure (30). In some parts of the world, fouling may be
a foot or more thick causing severe structural deterioration of ocean
platforms. Numerous studies conducted on North Sea oil rigs have
revealed that a 2-inch thickness of fouling led to an overall load
increase of 5.5% on the typical p1atform. 38 In addition to load
increase, fouling can can cause the following effects on floating
platforms:
(1) Increased drag and corrosion rates.
(2) The abrasion and possible severance of mooring lines

and cables.
(3) Reduction in overall stability and mobility.
(4) Direct deterioration of structural components.
(5) Degradation of periodic inspections and maintenance.
Finally, the process of fouling is almost impossible to completely arrest.
The effects can, however, be minimized by the following: selection of
construction materials that exhibit a natural resistance to fouling;
utilizing anti-fouling paints and inhibitors; periodic cleaning and
inspection; and, probably the most important, considering these
effects in the overall design.
CORROSION
Corrosion is due to an electrochemical process that occurs when
two dissimilar metals are present in an electrolytic medium.
38
John Gaythwaite, "The Marine Environment and Structural Design",
(New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1981), pp. 276.
52
Navigation bUoy heavily fouled with mussels.
Section of pipe laid op'en to show a plug of mussels.
Figure (30): Examples of excessive fouling.
(From: "Marine Fouling and its Prevention," Woods Hole Oceanographic

Institution, Annapolis: United States Naval Institute, 1952.)
53
Sea water is an efficient electrolyte. Very simply, metals in contact
with sea water lose electrons or rust and become positively charged.
Thus, an electrical current is formed and the process continues,
see Figure (31). After a period of time, scaling or pitting of the
surface of the metal will occur. Eventually if corrosion is allowed
to continue, the metal will completely deteriorate and dissolve.
Like fouling, the process of corrosion can never be completely
eliminated. It can, however, be minimized and controlled. Careful
consideration by the structural engineer, in the overall functional
design and selection of materials can reduce the effects of corrosion
on floating structures. In addition, Figures (32-34) illustrate
protective coatings, claddings, rust inhibitors and cathodic-protection
that are available to the engineer to combat the effects of corrosion.
ICE
Finally, the effects of ice, must be taken into account in the
design of floating structures. Figure (35) summarizes the numerous
forces that ice can exert. The structural engineer has many options
and alternatives in designing floating platforms to reduce the
impact of ice, see Table (2). The critical factor is that these
structural design alternatives are applied to all structures located
in areas where ice is present.
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
Presently there are two choices of construction materials for
artificial floating islands, steel and concrete. Steel has been
the traditional building material for marine vessels and platforms.
54
• -e:-t
CoIhodoc _
Figure (31): Electrolytic Corrosion.
(From; K.J. Rawson and E.C. Tupper, Basic Ship Theory,

(New York: Longman, 1977), pp. 546.)
INHIBITIVE
COATINGS
SUPERSTRUCTURE RESISTANT TO
ATMosPHERIC SEA EXPOSURE CONTINUOUS
CONDENSATION MARINE
SALT PRECIPITATION ATMOSPHERE
REQUIRED
DEEP LOAD LINE TO RAIL

SEVERE CORROSION WET· DRY
POSSIBLE ABRASION
BOOnOPPING
MAXIMUM CORROSION
ABRASION
CONTINUOUS WET'" DRY
SPLASH· SPRAY
COATINGS WITH MAXIMUM
PROPERTIES REQUIRED HERE
GENERAL SEA WATER CORROSION

IMPERVIOUS COATINGS REQUIRED HERE
Fiqure (32): Choice of coatings for different zones of off shore structures
(From: Francis L. Laque, Marine Corrosion: Causes and Prevention,

(New York: John Wiley, 1975), pp. 298.)
55
-------~-----
....."fTlV! COAT!IIO$
MilITANT TO CONTINUOUI
ATlIKlPHE~IC "A~INE
CONDITIONS "EOUI~ED.
'''EC'',TATED
MLT
CONDENSATION
ATMOllPHE~IC
lEA EXI'OSURE COATINGS
GENERAL
SEA WATER IMPERVIOUS COATINGS
CORROSION ARE REQUIREO HERE.
Figure (33) various zones on marine structures where coatings

are used as the primary means of protection.
(From: Francis L. Laque, Marine Corrosion: Causes and prevention,

(New York
Controller
Grounds
r-----
,
I
•I Anode
~
........
Figure (34): Diagram of automated cathodic protection control system.
(From: Francis L. Laque, Marine Corro@ion: Causes and Prevention,

56
~
~
Compolite diIpam of ice forca. AbbnYiationl: ~ = expuuion of captive k:e

,..... in pocketl (DOt lhown);FG .. iDcreue pawty 10id due to lCCUIIIulation of ice I8d
fIozen qnay;FH = horizontal thruIt due to preIIUft of ice Iheet monel by wiDd or wu.at
. . . . . OJ due to expaDIioe of ice widI dIina temperatun iD endOled . . .; I'j = impact of
=
icebazp UJd bits dmen by wind or current (or wuela);FU uplift on piles due to adhesion
of ice aad1iIia. =
wata ..... ;Fy ftrticaI force due to buoyancy of ice ......t beneath x·
Inc:iDI or batter pies I8d dowBwud due to weitht of tDppecI ice JIIeet. Note: FH I8d
Fj do DOt ICt limaltaaeC*lly.
Figure (35): Composite diagram of ice forces.
(From: John Gaythwaite, The Marine Environment and Structural

Design, (New York: Van Nos~and Reinhold, 1981), pp. 247.)
57
E'' ' I 0'
n ..,11
ice
Ef'ecl on 11,,,,,,,,81 deli...
Deoian for maximum expected

----
thrust with ,ep,d 10: ice Ihic~-

nell, temperature rjse. degree of
..sl,ainl. etc.
r··· .
~ - -----
Erfecl on f"nclional doli...
Avoid exposure to Ihr"sl if possible

(r.c, moor 110ats Wllh anchors VI.
piles); U~ alternate suucture, [i.e.,
«lis vs. pier}; use proper configura-
lion.
- -- --_._-::..~.::
Opcl3lional conwelilioni
-------_.
Prevent frccJ.mg at structure, b~bbleRw
heaters, c tc.: it feasible, caution in u. 01
ice bu::ak.:n. 111 confined areal .
__ .
. ---
Uplifl (jackillal Desill' for maximum expected up- PthnuuiLc U~ and/or number of piles; Usc bubblers, moor l10ilts in winter • •
Ii£! wilh rellard 10 ice Ihic~ne>so design pile 10 resur upli£!; use mawvO son: do nut leave fixed to anchor piAa.
tide ranae. etc, structure, minimize x~bracing; use prop-
er shapes.
......1 Desip for p,obable ice loadl with Avoid exposed lile>. Use camels or other protective dcvicea.
..p,d 10 mau, velocilY. and dircc-
tion.
---_. -~-_.-
h .......n - Avoid designing pockets and areas that

can hap freczin. water.
Gr.Wly Desip fOIaddilional we'llhI of ice Slope decks for drainaac; "se proper Prevent icc Irom freezing on deckl (i.e••
VI
00 wilh ,eprd 10expected accumula- configuration, healers, sail,').
lion.
---- ----
hoylllCY Delian fo, "plih u requited. Provide "au gap" above hillheSl expect-
ed lide level; avoid x-bracing; design \0
prevent icc Innn gelllhil under docks.
_.---- L..._.~ __ ._
AceNIion Consider inc,eased projected areas I.JcSlgll with adequate drainage 10 pre- Keep lh:ck.,)ciear .
in wind and current force calc"la- vent icc build-up.
uons; llIavily loads al above.
---- _..__ ._----- _._._--
AIlruian Consider erreCl1 of redaced secuou Usc cladding, impervious materials;
p,ope,liel in dcsip. cham fer all sharp edges un concrete;
..void projecnons: protect exposed nm-
bcr in IIIJe lone.
--- -----
F,eeu-Ihaw Specify d.nse and du..ble concrete A"iOIU immersion in tide zone (i.e .. CX~
tCOll<:..la) mix (i.•.•• ow W/C rano, Iype II pcsurc 10 "lIornale _lIin. and dlym&).
c~monl)~ 'lit . . .AU.... ana admix-
'UIC'.
....0......-- __ .. __ .__
Table (2): Effects of Ice on Design of ftffshore Sfructure ••
(From: John Gaythwaite, The Marine Environment and Structural

Design, (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1981) , p p , 248.)
Steel is a homogeneous material with excellent strength characteristics;
it may be cast, forged, or worked in plate form. It is susceptible to
various welding processes and the weldments are uniform and reliable.
The primary disadvantage of steel for shipbuilding use is its lack
of resistance to corrosion. It is exceptionally vulnerable to
corrosion in the presence of sea water, and this characteristic, therefore,
demands careful attention to painting and constant vigilance in
maintenance.
The second construction material under consideration for artificial
floating islands is concrete.
It is reported that on the day in 1862 set for the

launching of Merchant, the first iron steamer on
the Great Lakes, one of her owners went off to his
summer home, ostensibly (and probably actually)
because he did not wish the doubtful pleasure of
seeing his ship disappear beneath the waves.
How much more would these people have distrusted
a ship built of stone! Yet this is essentially what
a concrete steamer is, and the reinforced concrete
vessels built in the United States at the time
of the First and Second World War proved themselves
en:irely s:awo y and practicable from an engineering
p01nt of V1ew.39h
Concrete has many advantages over steel. They include:
(1) Much more durable material in a marine environment

than steel.
(2) Can be made impervious to sea water, corrosion and

resistant to abrasion.
(3) Resistant to the build-up of marine organisms.
(4) Repairable on site; above or below the water line.
39
Jean Haviland, "American Concrete Steamers of the First and
Second World Wars", American Neptune, vol. 22, no. 3, 1962, pp. 157.
59
(5) Readily available material.
(6) Workable into any shape.
(7) Has excellent compression strength.
(8) Is highly resistant to fire damage.
(9) Has toughness and high resistance to brittle fracture.
(10) When continually submerged will gain strength with the

passage of time.
In 1971 an attempt was made to prove that concrete was an
excellent material for ocean structures by the Naval Civil Engineering
Laboratory (NCEL), Port Hueneme, California. The NCEL deployed 18
hollow concrete spheres in water depths of 2000-4000 feet. Each sphere,
66-feet in diameter with 4-inch thick walls, was anchored to the
seafloor by the 2600 pound weight of a 2 1/4 inch anchor chain 53

40
feet long.
Examination of one of these spheres, recovered after

10 years at a depth of 1800 feet, revealed no visible
corrosion to the steel reinforcement bars although
in some areas of the model the steel had less than
one inch of concrete cover. Nor was there visible
deterioration of the concrete material itself in 41
any of the five spheres and blocks retrieved to date.
The study conducted by the NCEL firmly supports the hypothesis that
concrete is a viable construction material for ocean structures.
On the other hand, concrete has only three limiting factors when
compared to steel; (1) limited tensile strength, (2) low strength-
to-weight ratio, and (3) progressive deterioration when subjected
40
"Concrete Sphere Survives 10 Years at Depths of 975 Meters",
Sea Technology, October, 1982, pp. 52.
41
Ibid.
60
to alternate freezing and thawing. Simply stated, a concrete platform
requires larger structural members and will weigh more than a steel
platform of the same size and design. This in turn means that a concrete
platform will have a greater drag and would correspondingly increase
the mooring and/or station-keeping power requirements for such
a platform. Now let's briefly look at the historical beginnings of
concrete as a construction material for vessels and platforms.
The concept of using concrete for vessels was developed in
1848 by J.L. Lambot in France when he built 10-foot long reinforced mortar
rowboats. By the late 1800's and early 1900's numerous countries
had applied Lambot's principles for building ocean-going concrete
barges in expectation that these could be built and maintained more
cheaply than steel ships and barges. With the entrance of the United
States into the First and Second World Wars, concrete vessels
provided a means to compliment a war-torn merchant fleet and at the

42
same time reduce a serious steel shortage. During the early
1940's, for example, 100 concrete hulls were built, some being self-
propelled dry cargo ships in excess of 300 feet long, see Table (3).43
From an engineering point of view, concrete vessels were a
complete success:
There was general agreement that (concrete vessels) were

entirely seaworthy and that they handled well. A particular
merit was that in them there was no condensation as in
steel ships and, as a consequence, their cargo kept
42
Jean Haviland, "American Concrete Steamers of the First and
Second World Wars", American Neptune, vol. 22, no. 3, 1962, pp. 158.
43
Ibid, pp. 182.
61
Name Tonnage Hull Engine
Gross Net Builder Dimensions (feet) Builder Dimension
At/antus 2481 15°2 Liberty 249.3 x 43.5 x 2'2·5 Worthington, 19",32",56" x 36"
Buffalo
Cape Fear 2795 16g3 Liberty 2'66.6 x 46.0 x 24.8 Worthington 19",32",56" x 36"
Cuyamaca 64 86 4082 Pacific 420.7 x 54.0 x 34-!1 Llewellyn 241/2",4 1 Y2",72" X ~r
Darlington 1433 1332 MacDonald 290.2 x 33.9 X 22.0 Bolinders
Dinsmore 6144 3696 Bently 420.0 x 54.0 x 35.0 Hooven 241/2"' 4 1 th", 72" x 48"
Durham 1433 1332' MacDonald 290.2 x 33.9 X 22.0 Bolinders
Faith 3427 2°7 1 San Francisco 320.0 x 44.5 x 27·7 Bethlehem,
Alameda
Lathem 6287 3893 Ley 420.7 x 54.0 x 34-4 Hooven
McKittrick 2702 1528 Newport 300.1 x 44.0 x 24.0 Nordberg
(ex. Tanker
NO.1)
Moffitt Bently 420.0 x 54.0 x 35.0 Hooven
ParD Alto San Francisco 420.0 x 54.0 x 35.0 Llewellyn
Peralta San Francisco 420.0 x 54.0 x 35.0 Llewellyn
Polias Fougner 267.3 x 46.0 x 23.4 Worthington,
Ampere
San Pasqual 6486 4082 Pacific 420.7 x 54.0 x !l4.3 Llewellyn
Sabona 2795 1693 Liberty 266.6 x 46.0 x 24.8 Worthington
Table (3): Examples of Concrete Vessels Built

in the United States.
(From: Jean Haviland, "American Concrete Steamers of the

First and Second World Wars", American Neptune, vol. 22,
no. 3, 1962, pp. 181.)
62
particularly well. One master complained that the
crew's quarters were unbearably hot in warm weather,
but otherwise he was much pleased with his concrete 44
ship and definitely preferred her to a Liberty ship.
Unfortunately, concrete vessels were not successful from an economic
perspective. "While mass production could doubtlessly have lowered
costs, there is nothing in the United States to suggest a realization
of the early hope that concrete vessels could be constructed more

45
cheaply than those of steel."
Today the "cards" have changed. During the past ten years, steel
prices have sky-rocketed to the point where concrete is relatively
inexpensive when compared to steel. So much so that, when cost is added
to the list of advantages over steel, it is easy to understand
why concrete is being considered for the majority of all future
artificial islands.
44
Ibid, pp , 181.
45
Ibid.
63
Chapter 3
APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLANDS
"Now is the hour of the genesis of floating architecture.,,46
Previous chapters discussed the earliest stages in the development of
floating platforms, dealing with their history and design. Lets
examine closely into the crystal-ball and perceive with our minds
the future uses for artificial floating islands. Explicitly this
discussion will focus on three relevant applications:
(1) Urban expansion.
(2) Electric power generation.
(3) Mid-ocean ba~ing for the military.
CITIES OF THE FUTURE
Heavily populated regions of the world, particularly near the
coast, are experiencing a major dilemma, limited land. Man is
continuously in search of sites for housing, industry, and public
recreation. In attempting to accomplish this insurmountable task,
he (man) is confronted with a land resource that is overpopulated,
overpolluted and undersupplied with natural resources. One possible
solution to this dilemma is to build on water. The concept is not
new. The entire city of Venice, Italy was built on pilings in the
fifth century. During the thirteenth century, the Netherlands
began reclaiming the watery deltas of the Rhine, Maas and ScheIdt
46
Jurgen Claus, Planet Meer, (Cologne: Verlag M. der Mont Schauberg,
1972) .
64
47
rivers using poldering. More recent examples in the nineteenth
century include the coastal cities of Boston, Massachusetts and
New Orleans, Louisiana. "Almost 60 percent of the old city of
Boston was once under water, including the entire Back Bay district;
95 percent of New Orleans is still below water level, protected

48
by levees." Prior to the late 1950's urban expansion of coastal
cities on water fell into the three patterns mentioned above;
piling, land-filling, and poldering, see Figure (36). During the
early 1960's however, a fourth and futuristic approach to urban
expansion on water emerged. The floating city. The first attempt
to design such a city was in 1961 by architect Buckminster Fuller,
who was commissioned by a Japanese businessman to design a tetrahedronal
floating city for Tokyo Bay.
A native New Englander, Richard Buckminster Fuller spent his
summers as a boy among Maine fishermen. During that time he became
fascinated with net weaving, tieing, splicing, and discovered that a
fishermen's net gained strength from tensioning the lines. Ironically,
one of the oldest occupations in the world lead him to design
revolutionary architectural structures. One of Fuller's criteria in
design was maximum performance per pound of metal invested. He
employed conventional materials, steel, but shifted their orientation
to utilize them the strong way rather than the weak, lengthwise instead
of edgewise, to benefit from the pull rather than take a chance on
47
Walter Mcquade, "Urban Expansion Takes to the Water," Fortune.
September 1969, pp. 131.
48
Ibid.
65
PILING
LAND-FILL
POLDERING~"
Figure (36) Three traditional methods of building on water.
(From: walter McQuade, "Urban Expansion Takes To The Water,"

Fortune, September 1969, pp. 132-33.)
66
the break. Very simply, try to break a pencil in two; it is easy.
Try to pull it in two; not so easy. Buckminster Fuller's most
noteworthy achievement was the geodesic dome, see Figure (37).
It is a regular polyhedron of any size which can be

erected with a minimum of on-site labor. Perhaps
his best known dome was that built for the United
States pavilion at the Montreal Expo, 1967, which
was 250 feet in diameter and stood 200 feet high.
The basic unit was a hexahedron of steel tubing,
glazed with gray-tinted plastic acrylic panels
which were graduated from ~gear at the bottom
to the darkest at the top.
Finally, Fuller had invisioned a two mile-wide dome to seal
off mid-town New York. This coverall would save, he argued, the
incalculable expenses of air conditioning, street cleaning, snow
removal, head colds, umbrellas, rubbers, and so on, see Figure (38).
As mentioned earlier, Fuller was tasked to design a floating city
for Tokyo Bay. His design, dubbed "Triton City", utilized a
tetrahedron shape, see Figures (39) and (40). His reasoning
was based on the fact that the tetrahedron has the most surface with
the least volume of all polyhedrons. Fuller stated:
The tetrahedron provides the most possible "outside"

living. Its sloping external surface is adequate for
all its occupants to enjoy their own private, outside,
tiered, terracing, garden homes. These are most economically
serviced from the common nearest possible center of volume
of all polyhedrons. All the mechanical organics of the
floating city are situated low in its hull for maximum
stability. All the shopping centers and other commercial
service facilities are inside the structure; tennis courts
and other facilities are on the top deck. 50
49
Leland M. Roth, A Concise History of American Architecture,
(New York: Harper & Row, 1979), pp. 322.
50
Richard B. Fuller, "Floating Cities," World. December 19, 1972,
pp. 40.
67
Figure (37): R. Buckminster Fuller, U.S. Pavilion, Montreal
EXpo, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 1967.
(From: Leland M. Roth, A Concise History of American Architecture,

(New York: Harper & Row, 1979), pp. 323.)
68
- .: ........
......
.~
''''' ...
<,
:
-,
.
"
\.
:' .,
,
Figure (38): Buckminster Fuller's geodesic dome concept over New York City.
(From: R. Buckminster Fuller, "Why Not Roofs Over Our Cities?"

Think, January-February 1968, pp. 8-9.)
69
"'-J
o
Figure (39): Buckminster Fuller shows his floating city to u.s. housing officials.
(From: R. Buckminster Fuller, "Why Not Roofs Over Our Cities?"

Think, January-February 1968, pp. 8-9.)
A fully developed flvilting city for 100,000 inhabit-
ants where residences and urban units combine.
....
.......
Figure (40): Buckminster Fuller's Floating city.
(From: R. Ruckminster Fuller, "Floating cities," World, December 19, 1972, pp. 40-1.)
In 1966, after the design was near completion, the Japanese client
passed away and the project was abandoned. But, all was not lost.
The United States Office of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) ,
under the Johnson Administration, commissioned Fuller to continue his
work on the floating city under a HUD grant. The idea was to
investigate the technical and economic feasibility of locating
"Triton Cities" adjacent to major coastal cities.
The basic unit of the "Triton City" plan is a neighborhood-

sized floating community that would accommodate 3,500 to 6,500
people. There are two kinds of neighborhood modules designed
for the city. One is composed of a string of four to six
small platforms, each holding about 1000 people, the other
is a larger, triangular platform which would be of high
density and have capacity for as many as 6,500. Three to
six of these neighborhoods, with a total population of
15,000 to 30,000, would form a town. At this point, a
new town platform including a high school, more commercial,
recreational and civic facilities, and possibly some light
industry, could be added. When the community has reached
the level of three to seven towns (90,000-125,000 population),
it would become a full-scale city and would then add a
center module containing governmental offices, medical
facilities, a shopping center, and possibly some form of
special city-based ac§ivity like a community college or
specialized industry.
Fuller designed "Triton City" to be flexible to location. In coastal
areas and sheltered harbors the barge concept discussed in Chapter 2
is employed; for deep-sea installations, large semi-submersible platforms
are utilized.
Having completed the design, Fuller sent his device to the United
States Navy's Bureau of Yards and Docks. "The Bureau of ships verified
51
Shoji Sadao, "Buckminster Fuller's Floating City," The Futurist.
February 1969.
72
all calculations and found the design to be practical and "seaworthy",
and the cost was within 10 percent of projected cost which bore out
its occupiabi1ity at rental just above poverty-level income.,,52
Inauspeciously, when the Nixon Administration entered office,
Fuller's research grant was terminated and the "Triton City" project
deteriorated. Once again history repeats itself; "Triton City" had

53
pursued the footsteps of artificial floating platforms.
The future of artificial floating islands appears grim. But, there is
still hope. In 1971, Dr. John Craven, Dean of Marine Programs, University
of Hawaii, and Japanese architect Kiyonori Kikutake had been involved
in the conceptual development and engineering design of a large floating
platform, known as "Floating City".
Craven and Kikutake designed "Floating City" from a unique
perspective. They initially examined the minimum requirements necessary
for an urban society. These include:
(1) An economic supply of water, food, clothing, and

shelter for all inhabitants.
(2) Non-polluting, rap1d, comfortable, flexible, and

immediate transportation for people who may be
carrying from 40 to 80 pounds of goods.
(3) Non-polluting and non-obstructive transportation

of goods in quantities in excess of 80 pounds.
(4) Telephone, radio, television, printed media, mail,

accounting and computational communications.
52
Richard B. Fuller, "Floating Cities," World. December 19, 1972,
pp. 40.
53
See Chapter 1; Projects MOROLE and DELOS.
73
(8) Opportunities for experiencing variety and the freedom
to select or alter ones' local environment.
.
(9) Preservat10n 0f " 1 ar opportun1ty
S1m1 . f or poster1ty.
. 56
With these factors implanted in their minds, Craven and Kikutake
began to design the "ideal" Floating City.
Their "Floating City" design utilizes the beehive concept
developed by idealist/architect Paolo Soleri, see Figure (41).
Living spaces are located around the periphery to afford maximum
privacy and unobstructed view of the natural seascape. Proceeding
inward, population density increases toward shopping areas and
community services. Finally, population density is maximum at the core,
where entertainment and religious facilities are located. Industrial
activities, utilities and transportation systems are located
beneath the beehive equidistant from all other points. This allows
maximum utilization and distribution of services to the populas, and,
eliminates the congestion and unpleasantness often associated with
the like.
During the summer of 1972 the University of Hawaii and the
Naval Undersea Center evaluated a 50-ton, 1:20 scale steel model
of "Floating City", illustrated in Figure (42):
The test model employs 30 bottle-shaped cylindrical

legs mounted on 10 triad modules; each triad contains
three legs that are joined rigidly. The modules are
hinged together at the deck and bolted at the upper
and lower horizontal connections. Within each module
are three upper and three lower struts, welded to form
an integral portion of the module. The lower struts
56
John P. Craven, "Cities of the Future: The Maritime Dimension,"
American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1980, pp. 182-183.
75
LIVING
NEIGHBORHOOD
.,
.. :
.
I -
-- po.
-
..
\
. --"'. -"'0
'1 '.-l.J~\.- _.
Figure (41): Paola Soleri's beehive concept for a floating city.
(From: Paolo Soleri, ArcologY: The City in the Image of Man,

(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1969), pp. 15.)
76
---<--- ---
-<- "'" . .>>:
-" ~ ~ -~, - - ~
......
......
Figure (42): 1/20 scale model of the Craven & Kikutake Floating City
project. Model diameter is 50 feet.

are flooded to bring the center of gravity as low as possibl
but the upper struts serve as watertight, buoyancy chambers. 57
Testing was completed in March 1973. The results verified the
theoretical predictions of Craven and Kikutake that, within today's
technology, a floating city can be built and safely operated.
The Craven and Kikutake design was so successful that the
Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry decided to
display "Aquapolis", a floating city, as a symbol of the International
Ocean Exposition, Okinawa Japan, see Figure (43). Time precluded
the construction of a vertical column platform, therefore a semi-
submersible structure was designed. Construction began in
January 1974 by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and was completed one year
later, see Figure (44).
"Aquapolis" is a welded cubic semi-submersible structure
similar to Project MOHOLE. The supporting structure consists of
16 columns standing on four lower huils, see Figure (45) and Table (4).
On the columns there stands an upper structure consisting of the main
deck, the middle and the upper deck. A brief description of the
decks follows:
On the main deck there are the Aqua Hall, display

space, machine room, Aqua port, dining room, kitchen
and clerical office. The Aqua Hall accomodates the
Aqua screen, temporary stage for entertainment and
assemblies, and Marineorama. There are also city facilities
like the "rest corner', "telephone corner", uiriformation
corner" and the Aqua post office from which visitors can
57
"Stationary Floating Ocean Platforms," Ocean Engineering,
(Washington: National Technical Information Service, January
1975), pp. 86-87.
78
-...J
\0
Figure (43): AQUAPOLIS: Floating Pavilion of the Government

of Japan, International Ocean Exposition, Okinawa, Japan.
• Completed four lower hulls (January 1974)
~
1. Auembly of a column (February 1974) 2. Assembly of the columns comploted (April 1974) 3. ASl8mbly of the main deck SllIrllld IApril 1974)
... -'--.--
......
~ ';.,.~
.
~,'.
.....
.' ~..:-
.,'
;;;;-;;;;;. - .
,~-~
~'" ~t'riii~""
P .,
,
.: .
.~
~" ---_-:
-J
~~
...-~~... .. ~;.
---- \kC
.~" .•.~{'..
" .
...
f;.\.... ., ':'7:J.~ ...;..•~:::...~

. .~. '. '. '.
~. • ' '. './ • .:;.", r
II"" . ..,.~.....,j •
4. Auembly of both sides and ISl8mbly of the main 5. ASl8mbly of the uppor dock and 1110 central part 8. ASl8mbly of tho upper deck complollld (October
decks comploted (Mey. 1974) of the main deck (Juno 1974) 1974)
Figure (44): Construction sequence of Aquapolis.
(From: Japan Association for the International Ocean Exposition,

Okinawa. The Aquapolis Project Department)
80
Upper Deck
,. SmoIta.tack
2. "'"t Hou.
3 Heliport
Middle D..k
r. Manage... nt room
2. Marlnor • .,.
3. Prall center
4, Control room
6. Computer room
6 R.lidenee .r••
7 Windla..
8 Stem
Me .. Deck
,C"ntral hall
2 MachIne room
3 Berth space
4 Mannor.ma
5. Sao foraSl
6 ObaHY8tory corridor
7 Panorama of Aqua Ferming
8. DIning room
9. KrtcI1en
'0 Clerical off"",
Upper Deck.
Middle Deck.
Mlin Deck.
Figure (45): Basic layout of Aquapolis.
(From: .Japan Association for the International Ocean Exposition,

Okinawa. The Aquapolis project Department)
81
Dimensions
1) Overall structure
Length 104.0 m
Width 100.0 m
Height (from the base of the lower
hull to the main deck)
26.0m
(from the base of the lower
hull to the upper deck)
32.0m
2) Lower hull
a) Small (outside) lower hulls (2)
Length 56.0 m
Width 10.0 m
Depth 6.0 m
b) Large (inside) lower hulls (2)
Length 104.0 m
Width 10.0 m
Depth 6.0 m
3) Column
a) Large columns (12) 7.5 m. dia.
b) Small columns (4) 3.0 rn, dia.
4) Area of the Upper Deck (including a
surrounding peripheral corridor)
1.0,000 m 2
5) Total weight
15.647 tons (lightly loaded)
28.070 tons (fully loaded)
Table (4): Design parameters for Aquapolis.

82
send letters to their home directly from the first
floating city built in the world.
The middle deck contains rooms for visting VIPs
and staff officials, the central control room, utility
control room, computer room and the residence area for
about 40 employees. The central room receives information
from the computer room, utility control room, ballast
control room and the Aqua Hall, and using TV sets for
observation set up at many places it carries out unitary
management of the Aquapolis.
The upper deck has the Aqua Plaza, where visitors
can take a rest and see pavilions on the Expo site.
The penthouse, lawns, and heliport are located on the
Aqua Plaza, which in future floating cities will be
the place where collectors of natural energy, such
as solar and wind energy, are set up.58
As a complete urban environment, "Aquapolis" was designed to
fulfill the functions of a city to include:
(1) The generation of electrical power. The electrical

power plant is composed of two 1,200 kW main
generators, one 250 kW emergency generator, and
one 24 V 400 AH battery which may be used as an
emergency source of electricity.
(2) The supply of water. Fresh water required by the

floating city is obtained through the distallation
of ocean water. "Aquapolis" has the capability to
distill 66 tons of water per day.
(3) Sewage treatment. The treatment facility has a capacity

of 90 tons of waste per day, or can accommodate
approximately 3000 persons. Sludge, the by-product
of sewage treatment is burned in a spray-combustion
incinerator.
(4) Waste Disposal. All wastes including paper, vegetable

waste, and plastic are burned in a two-phase incinerator.
It is then discharged as a smokeless, odorless and
harmless gas.
(5) Disaster Prevention. Aquapolis provides a complete

fire and flooding alert and prevention system.
58
"Aquapolis," Japan Association for the International Ocean
Exposition, Okinawa. The Aquapolis Project Department, 1975.
83
e sav i
I t a 1 so prOV1. d es sop h"1st1cate d 1·1 f esav1ng .
equ1pment. 59
Figures (46 and 47) illustrate schematic diagrams of the services
provided by "Aquapolis".
Japan's "Aquapolis" and Hawaii's "Floating City" have demonstrated
positively that it is now technically feasible to evolve Clr'devemop
a floating urban community. Before discussing the future of
floating platforms, lets look at other possible applications.
POWER GENERATION
Competitive land and water uses in densely populated coastal
areas of the world, and, the recent drive to preserve and improve
the environment, have placed heavy industry and other environment-
burdening activities in a unique situation; where to locate their
facilities. One'possible solution to this dilemma is to locate these
facilities on artificial floating islands. Although there are
numerous envir~nment-burdening activities that could utilize the
floating platform concept, this section will specifically look at
the feasibility of floating coal-fired and nuclear power generating
plants.
Floating Coal-Fired Power Plant
Since the Arab oil embargo and until just recently, the United
States has promoted the use of energy alternatives to reduce our
dependence on foreign oil. One such alternative was the substitution
59
Ibid.
84
AQUAPCM.IS
Extw.a1 Gas . . . ._ .
Cooling ~1er .0+-_. . . .. . ._ _. ._ . . . Ton...
Amount of Smoke Dust O.7g'Nm 1 . " __";!""
Amountof SrnoIte Dus1 0.35g, Nml ."---i- In-combustible
..-5"""' ....
EUrtyed Wetllr Oil contentratlo tI
..
IlOO&;::':·..--------------------------'
SS',,- 5<Jpm
Figure (46): Flow diagram of services provided by Aquapolis.

85
Utility Control Room
Figure of Sewage
Treatment Equiprnents
Sew_
I "
II
FeCIITa~~
I!J--+, r-0--- - .
co
.·.·.
",
I
•
I
0\ "
••
:
I
r- J
@2P,-",p
@2B1.-r
L1 rt-u----(&-J
~ Motor
First Staga Sewage Coagulating
I sludge ta~
ce> I 1
(I)
Treatment Faciity Sedimentation Tan~. Adlllated Sludge FaCIlIty
~~n~rator
Figure (47): Sewage treatment facilities for Aquapolis.

of coal for oil in the generation of electrical power. The only
major drawback associated with coal-fired power generation was
air pollution. Coal-fired power plants generate more air pollution
than oil-fired power plants, therefore, in order to meet stringent
air quality standards, land-based coal-fired power plants were
required to install capital intensive pollution abatement systems,
a Catch 22. The solution, construct a floating coal-fired power
plant.
During the mid 1970's the Ocean Engineering Systems department
at the University of Hawaii under the direction of Dr. John P. Craven,
investigated the feasibility of a floating coal-fired power plant.
Their objective goal was:
The design, construction, and deployment of an

offshore energy conversion system that is capable"of
operating at a location at sea near a point on shore
utilizing the energy derived via marine space and
converting this energy into 100MW of electric power
with pollutant emissions which insure maintenance of
established environmental standards on shore, and
having the capability to be expanded at some future
date to produce an additional 50MW of packaged
energy, and that this system will successfully
perform 95% of the time with a conditional probability
of 95% that the average yearly outage will be less than
or equal to 8 hours and have a demonstrated reliability
of 95%. Inherent in this objective goal is the value
judgement that mass-produced coal power plant systems
will be more saleable in 100 MW units as prime power
for small island nations and communities and as
supplemental power for major installations during
g~owth or transition periods. 60
A semi-submersible hull (similar to Project MOHOLE) was chosen for
the buoyant support. Consideration had been given to the barge concept
60
John P. Craven, "Some Economic and Engineering Considerations
For a Floating, Coal-Fired 100mW Power Plant," Ocean 75, 1975, pp. 272.
87
due to its lower construction costs. Figure (48). The primary
reason for this decision was stability. The semi-submersible platform
with its greater stability over the barge. permitted the use of
standard land. lower cost. based systems and components rather
than expensive. marine systems. The overall dimensions of the
floating power plant are: (1) a platform above the ocean interface
which is 390 feet long by 340 feet wide and (2) three main hulls
which occupy a volume of 390 feet wide by 750 feet long by 90

61
feet deep.
The environmental impact of a floating coal-fired power plant,
versus a land-based plant was given serious investigation. Certainly
the idea behind locating environment-burdening activities offshore
was not out-of-sight. or. out-of-mind. By locating coal-fired
power plants offshore, advantages accrue from distance and diffusion.
Although particulate emission control systems are still required.
they are simpler in design and lower in cost when compared to
land-based systems. Finally, Tables (5-9) summarize the conclusions
of Dr. Craven's analysis.
Floating Nuclear Power Plant
The Arab oil embargo of 1973 also sparked a greater interest in
nuclear power. Unfortunately, the land-based nuclear power industry
was confronted with numerous setbacks during this time. to include:
(1) In densely populated or rapidly growing regions the
61
Ibid. pp. 273.
88
CHM£Y
COAL iii
STORAGE
Z
BALLAST •
II
~
8 ISOMETRIC PERSPECTIVE I
8 CROSS SECTION
1 '''f-~IMNEY
'T
r IL /~TA~
58- HEl!- PORT
i .....
-4---- fI TT ~
\~EAN SURFACE 19-
,
EMERGENCY .. f- CHl~Y ,'" VERTICAL
, 40&
EXIT
LIFT-OFF SECTION 7
._-' ~~TATION
VENTILATION .. ' - - - .
r
I
I
COAL STORAGE / BALLAST COAL STORAGE /8ALLAST
POWER PLANT )
I L-1AU.AST
,
I
-25 I
o
I
100
I I
I
I
400 500
I
e LONGITUDINAL SECTiON
Figure (48): Design configuration for a floating, coal-fired

power plant.
(From: John P. Craven, "Some Economic and Engineering Considerations
For a Floating, Coal-Fired 100mW Power Plant," Ocean 75,
1975, pp. 276.)
89
ESTIMATED DELIVERED COAL COSTS
Heating Value Heating Value

8,500 BTIJ/lb 10,000 BnJ/lb
costlton low range high range low range high ranle
Coal Cost at Mine $2.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 4.50
Overland Shipment 4.05 4.95 4.05 4.95
Terminal Charge .60 .90 .60 .90
OCean Shipment ....kl1 6.60 --l:..!1 6.60
Total Cost per Ton $9.80 $15.45 $10.80 $16.95
Cost per 106 BTU .57 .90 .51 .80
Table (5)
FIXED COST DIFFERENCES OF SEA AND LAND POWER PLANTS
Item Land Sea
1. Site High cost landsite No landsite costs
2. Site development and Conventional on-site construction Integral struc:ure in platfor~ con-
structure struction. Construction in ship-
yard.
3. Equipment Conventional plUS increment for Conventional - installcJ simultane-

freight and on-site installation ous with platform construction
4. Fuel storage Site and facilities, tanks fer oil None--free storage available in
hull--coal used as ballast
5. Electrical transrr.ission To load center To load center plus undersea trans-

mission
6. Stacks Standard Lower--reduced cost
7. Mooring and None Mooring and installation required

installation
8. Engineering costs Convent iona 1 Higher c os t
9. Air pollution Extensive high cost pollution Simple low COst units
equipment controlments
10. Cooling equipment Conventional once through piped Simpler cooling system
sea water with thermal pollution
controls
11. Insurance Standard Higher
12 • Property taxes Standard Unknown--probably lower
Table (6)

For a Floating, Coal-Fired lOcmW Power Plant," Ocean 75, 1975,
pp. 277.)
90
Table (7)
OPERATING COST DIFFERE~ES, EXCLUDING FUEL,

OF SEA AND LAND POWER PLANTS
Item Land Sea
l. Personnel Standard Higher--additilal

transport c os t s
2. Plant maintenance Standard Probably higher due to

and repairs lessened accessibility
and additional transport
costs
3. Pollution control Substantial costs for Simpler equipment,

operation of equipment lower costs
and disposal of liquid
and solid wastes produced
4. Ash disposal Standard Less if ocean dumping

is feasible, more if
land fill disposal
5. Fuel transfer Standard Not required. Direct

costs (port to discharge into plant.
plant)

For a Floating, Coal-Fired lOOrnW Power Plant," Ocean 75, 1975,
pp. 278.)
91
Table (8)
CAPITAL COSTS PEl lW
Land Sea
BaBic Plant Equipment* $ 136 $ 125

Land and Structure 35
Platform and Structure 58
Mooring and Connection 11
Undersea Cable 5
Delivery and Installation 3
S02 Pollution Control Equipment 25
Cooling System 4 3
Extra Engineering Costs 7
TOTAL COST PER KW s 200 $ 212
Total Plant Cost - 175 MW say: $35,000,000 $37,100,000
Annual Capital Cost @12% say:** $ 4,200,000 $ 4,460,000
Annual Capital Cost mills/KWH 3.4 3.6
*Excludes land, structures, cooling system, S02 control system.

**80% operating factor.
Table (9)
TOTAL COSTS OF POWER GENERATION, EXCLUDING FUEL, IN MILLS/KWH
Land Sea
Capital Costs 3.4 mills/KWH 3.6 mills/KWH
Other Fixed Costs 1.3 1.3
Operating Costs, Excluding Fuel 2 2
Total CostB, Except Fuel 6.7 mills/KWH 6.9 mills/lWH

.~
(From: John P. Craven, "Some Economic and Engineering Considerations For

a Floating, coal-Fired 10c.nW Power Plant," Ocean 75, 1975, pp. 279)
92
land available for nuclear plants is scarce or nonexistent.
Even in more remote and less populous areas where land
is more plentiful, power plants of any kind are rarely
welcome.
(2) The delays encountered during on-site construction of

typical nuclear plants have led to cost overruns of
many millions of dollars.
(3) The licensing and review process for individual plants

has dragged and been extended to the point that years
of delay have been added'to many plant schedules. Each
new delay adds additional millions of dollars to the final
cost of an operating nuclear plant. 62
Offshore Power Systems (OPS) , an enterprise of Westinghouse Electric
Corporation had the perfect solution, a Floating Nuclear Plant (FNP).
The FNP concept utilizes a conventional Westinghouse turbine-
generator and pressurized water reactor. The plant's IISO-megawatt
electrical outppt is enough to supply a city of 600,000 people. The
primary steam loop is located in a reinforced-concrete containment
building. In the unlikely event of a loss-of-coolant accident,
"China Syndrome", the FNP incorporates emergency power and cooling
systems designed to operate under severe conditions. The
containment building, turbine hall and electrical substation, control
room, auxiliary buildings and administrative and service areas are
situated on a barge-type floating platform, see Figure (49).
The hull is approximately 400 feet square and forty-four

feet deep. It is composed of watertight bulkheads and
ballast tanks inside a welded steel shell. The platform
has been designed to satisfy or surpass the applicable
standards of seaworthiness and safety set by the American
62
Offshore Power Systems, Jacksonville, Florida.
93
Figure (49): Basic layout for a Floating Nuclear Plant.
(From: Offshore Power Systems, Jacksonville, Florida)
94
63
Bureau of Shipping and the United States Coast Guard.
The FNP furnishes the electric utility and the consumer with
numerous key advantages over land-based systems. These advantages
include:
(1) Siting flexibility: FNP's will not be sited on land,

but on water--in rivers, estuaries, inlets or in the
open ocean, see Figures (50-52). Regardless of the
location, the FNP is identical for each site.
The FNP is simply towed to a selected location and
"pluged-in"; the only variable is the breakwater
configuration. If site parameters change, the FNP
can easily be towed to a different location.
(2) Minimized environmental impact. FNP's are designed

to minimize adverse impacts on the environment. Their
impact will be no greater, and in many cases actually
less, than the impact of a land-based nuclear plant.
Thermal effects are drastically reduced by utilizing
the dissipating act40n of the ocean. The resultant
plume of discharge water is focused in one direction
via a high flow circulating water system which
minimizes cooling water temperature. Equally important,
critical freshwater supplies, less and less available
on land, are not used for this cooling process. The
combination of warm discharge water and surrounding
breakwater serves as an artificial reef and allows
ocean plants and animals to flourish. Finally, FNP's
conserve valuable land. A two plant FNP site will occupy
only about 100 acres; a similar land-based site requires
500-5,000 acres depending on cooling water systems, site
layout, marshalling area, accessibility, etc. 64
(3) Simplified licensing procedure: All nuclear power

plants must be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC), the FNP is no exception. Initially,
the NRC queried Offshore Power Systems idea to mass
produce FNP's. After reviewing their (OPS) design, the
NRC amended its licensing regulations in 1973 and created
a new type of license called a "License to Manufacture."
This novel license would allow OPS to build a series of
identical FNPs without specific consideration of the
63
64
Ibid.
95
\0
0\
Figure (50): Floating Nuclear Plant sited offshore.

\0
"-.I
Figure (51): Floating Nuclear Plant sited nearshore.

\0
ce
Figure (52): Floating Nuclear Plant sited in riverine.

-
individual sites at which the plants will utimate1y
be installed and operated. The manufacturing license
would also meet over 80% of the regulatory requirements
encountered by custom-built onshore plants. The
buying utility would only have to meet specific plant/
site interface parameters, see Appendix (3), where
the floating plant would be anchored. Table (10)
illustrates the plant lead time reduction a FNP has,
versus a land-based nuclear plant. 65
(4) Standardized design: The majority of land-based nuclear

power plants are one-of-a-kind. This adds
tremendously to capital cost, which, is ultimately passed
on to the consumer. OPS concept for FNPs employs
standardization. This approach promises to minimize
capital costs by reducing both design expenses and the
amount of time required to bring a nuclear plant into
operation. 66
In 1973 OPS began to fabricate one of the world's largest
graving dock and slipway facilities, located on 875 acres of
Blount Island in the St. Johns River in Jacksonville, Florida,
see Figure (53). At about the same time, Public Service Electric
and Gas Company of New Jersey ordered four twin reactor units
that were to be located off the New Jersey coast. At $1.5 billion,
this was the largest order in the history of the electric utility
industry. For the next 5 years everything ran smoothly, the graving
dock and slipway had been dredged; a welding engineering laboratory;
manufacturing office and laboratory, maintenance building, and
warehouse complex were built. In addition, Figure (54) illustrates
a 900-ton gantry crane was installed. Shockingly, the bottom
dropped out of the gallows in 1978.
65
66
Ibid.
99
Table (10): comparison of Generating Plant Lead Times.
100
~
o
~
Figure (53): The Blount Island Manufacturing Facility as it will appear

when producing one FNP per year.

""'.> ~
~J1' ..J;fr:f~,· "
~ <
:lI"
'••'->~
,<;,~
~
, .. .,
.r ~
""' '~,
'" n. . _ - - -..1' ...."' . . . :.
4
o <.~>:;
.•.•.
f
, ..
;-
11 ;:
.....
o
tv
Figure (54): Offshore Power Systems 900-ton gantry crane.

Public Service Electric and Gas Company of New Jersey canceled
its whole order and has no intention of reentering the market.
The radical design of the floating plants drew

stiff opposition from environmental groups, which
caused numerous delays in the licensing process.
And public consumption of electricity did not grow
at the expected pace.
"It's just one of those unfortunate circumstances
that there has been a dramatic change in the growth
in the demand for electricity," Westinghouse
spokesman John Burke said. "The growth prior to the
oil embargo was about 7 percent. Now its 1 to 2
percent. And because of that, the market for
floating power plants has just not deve10ped.,,67
Recently, OPS has made plans to sell Blount Island. The facilities
are now being considered to construct oil rigs or repair supertankers.
Ironically, OPS received their "License tQ Manufacture" from the
NRC on June 30, 1982.
The last application for artificial floating islands to be
discussed, is that of Mid-Ocean Basing for the military.
MID-OCEAN BASING SYSTEMS
Now more than ever, United States presence overseas is essential.
During the 1960's and 1970's numerous hostile outbreaks occurred
around the world where quick United States military response was
required. The Cuban missile crisis, the Vietnam War and the Iranian
hostage incident were just a few examples. "In conventional terms the
most practical way of keeping strong military forces readily available
is to use an overseas base.,,68 In recent years however, there
67
Norm Going, "Westinghouse to Sell OPS Land on Blount Island,"
Times-Union, Jacksonville, Florida, December 1982.
68
Gordon J.F. MacDonald, Uses of the Seas, (Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall, 1968), pp. 175.
103
has been strong political opposition, from Greece and Japan for
example, to the existence of United States military installations
on foreign soil. How then could the United States continue to
excercise her military strength overseas?
The ultimate solution to overseas bases may lie

in the construction of giant floating platforms that
could be stationed against wind and current. A global
array of such sites would protect areas of strategic
interest, and would not be subject to the political
uncertainties of land bgses, which often are an
international irritant. 9
These giant floating platforms or Mid-Ocean Basing Systems
(MOBS) were investigated by the Defense Advanced Research Programs
Agency (ARPA) from 1968 through 1975 at a cost of $4 million.
ARPA established general requirements that a MOBS must satisfy.
These are:
(1) It can maintain position for periods of the order

of a year in mid-ocean.
(2) It can be self-sufficient for several months.
(3) It can be safe from the onslaught of the most

severe oceanic conditions expected.
(4) It can continue to fulfill its particular role

under all but the most extreme conditions for
some applications.
70
(5) It can be mobi1e.
71
The optimal choice was a deep buoyant structure. Included in ARPA's
69
Ibid, pp , 176.
70
"ARPA Stable Floating Platform," Scripps Institution of Oceanography,
May 5, 1969, pp. 1-2.
71
See Chapter 2 for complete description of deep buoyant structures.
104
investigations were the experimental verification of selected
theoretical analyses, and the experimental design and costing of
an airfield 500 feet wide and 6,000 feet long suitable for the
operational support of C-130 aircraft, naval forces and ground
forces. Figures (55-58) illustrate possible MOBS configurations.
Presently, the majority of technological problems associated
with MOBS and artificial floating islands in general have been
solved. Unfortunately, the political and legal ramifications for
their emplacement are yet unsolved.
105
- . I
e- !
CIS
-~ •m
O
0-
0
u
0
.---'""
,~
~
•=
< 0
0
....
e-.
=
>C
..
~
r...
106
~" <,
"'", ~
~M'l ~~?::qpI
\
~ ~$I~1t-~'"
\
\
...
\\ ,......,. --A, M-2
-------
,,,f0\"-, ",y.t\\
-,
\ r,....
....
o-.I
Artists Concept of a
...... -
Overall View of lOBS

Deck Sizes
Figure (56)
(From: Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California)

f@!!P- --a -.-.;".-----=-=-~=-<---..~
"I!IS: - - -_
-
- --
---=::=Em=·=if'i~n.,~~-----:c~~~
---
~ .-~·c--~:==--:~-
-
.....
o
00
~~-~~
~y :~'~;I~7_=c" affists ~pt of a
~r:.-~. . ;~- ~-~-:-_---_.:>
-f~~.00X1200ft-MOBS
__
~""'_./ -~.
Platform
.::--'-'~'.'"
Figure (57)
(From: Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California)

Artists Concept of a
400 X1200 ft. Ship Repair

... ,' ~ -=~_-.J _
------~
MOBS Platform
-._--~------~
--------_._~-- ._-_.
-~.. - "-," . .:....----
~~~
.D ...
--
----------- -------- ----
--------
I-'
a
\0
.,=",-_-=.:-:C~'-::::~==-=""--- _
Figure (58)
(From: Naval civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California)

Chapter 4
ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLANDS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Solving the technical problems associated with artificial
floating islands appears to be only the tip of the iceberg.
The legal and political characterization of floating platforms
may very well determine their final outcome. This issue was
first discussed in 1934 by Roberto Sandiford. He posed the
following legal questions concerning floating airports or seadromes
on the open ocean:
(1) What is the nature of these "floating islands?"

Should they be regarded as artificial islands
or as vessels?
(2) As they are destined to occupy permanently a definite

space of the high sea, can their establishment be
regarded as lawful and compatible with the principle
of the freedom of the seas and of navigation?
(3) If it is admitted that the establishment of such

floating islands is lawful, must they be placed
under the jurisdiction of anyone State?
(4) If it is admitted that such floating islands must be

placed under the jurisdiction of anyone State, is it
necessary that this State possess a sea-border?
(5) At any rate what is the legal regime to which such

floating islands will be or ought to be subjected?
(6) In order to assure the liberty of aerial navigation

and of the high seas, is it necessary that such islands
be placed under an international regime in peace time
and under a regime of neutralization in war time?
(7) Does the establishment of such floating islands carry

with it sovereignty over the adjacent sea space?71
71
Roberto Sandiford, "Aerodromes on the Open Seas," Air Law
Review, 1934, pp. 11.
110
Presently, some fifty years later these questions h~ve yet
to be completely answered. The final answer to these questions
will depend on the legal characterization of artificial

,
floating islands. Are they vessels? Are they structures? Or
are they states?
Artificial Floating Islands as Ships or Vessels
The term vessel or ship has had numerous definitions in
admiralty law through the years. In Cope v Vallette Dry-Dock
Co. (1887) the Supreme Court of the United States held that a
floating dry-dock was not a vessel. This was a libel for
salvage by the owners of a steam-tug against the Vallette
Dry-Dock Company, to recover salvage for salving the company's
dry-dock from sinking.
The libel alleges that the Vallette Dry-Dock

is a large floating vessel and water-craft and
artificial contrivance, used and capable of being
used as a means of transportation in water. 72
The Supreme Court stated:
A fixed structure, such as this dry-dock is,

not used for the purpose of navigation, is not
a subject of salvage service, any more than is a
wharf or a warehouse when projecting into or upon
the water. The fact that it floats on the water
does not make it a ship or vessel, and no structure
that is not a ship or vessel is a subject of salvage.
A ship or vessel, used for navigation and commerce,
though lying at a wharf, and temporarily made fast
are capable of receiving salvage service. 73
72
Nicholas J. Healy and David J. Sharpe, Cases and Materials
on Admiralty (St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1974), pp. 224.
73
Ibid, pp. 225.
III
In this case the key words used to define a vessel were, devoted
to the purpose of transportation, commerce and navigation.
During the 1940's through 1960's there was a rapid growth
in offshore fixed and floating platforms for oil exploration
and drilling. Along with this rapid growth came a change in the courts
definition of vessels and ships. In Offshore Co. v Robinson the
court stated that an oil rig meet the requirements as a vessel
even though it was not devoted to the purpose of navigation,
transportation or commerce. It had no engines, navigational
equipment and was fixed to the ocean floor while performing
its primary task.
There is an evidentiary basis for a Jones Act 74

case to go to the jury: (1) it there is evidence that
the injured workman was assigned permanently to a vessel
(including special purpose structures not usually
employed as a means of transport by water but designed
to float on water) or performed a substantial part
of his work on the vesse1 •••••. Expansion of the terms
"seaman" and "vessell! is consistent with the liberal
construction of the Act that has characterized it from
the beginning and is consistent with its purposes.
The absence of any legislative restriction has enabled
the law to develop naturally along with the development
of unconventional vessels, such as the strange-looking
specialized watercraft designed for oil operations
offshore and in the shallow coastal waters of the
Gulf of Mexico. 75
74
46 USC Section 688. The Jones Act applies to seamen injured
or killed in the cause of employment. It was passed to provide
seamen with the same rights to recover for negligence as they
would have had if they had not been seamen.
75
Nicholas J. Healy and David J. Sharpe, Cases and Materials
on Admiralty (St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1974), pp. 334.
112
With this dramatic change in the definitional test for a ship
or vessel under United States case law, it is conceivable that
artificial floating islands be classified as vessels or ships.
This being the case, artificial floating islands as vessels or
ships are subject to international regulation depending on
their location; (1) territorial sea, (2) contiguous zone,
(3) exclusive economic zone (EEZ), or (4) high seas.
The principle text regulating vessels in the territorial
sea and contiguous zone of a coastal State is the Convention on
the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone which came into
force on September 10, 1964. Although Article 1 states, "The
sovereignty of a State extends beyond its land territory and
its internal waters, to a belt of sea adjacent to its coast,
described as the territorial sea," it does not grant the coastal
State total sovereignty over foreign vessels within its territorial
sea. Specifically, the following Articles would apply to
artificial floating islands, should they be classified as vessels
or ships:
Article 14
1. Subject to the provisions of these articles, ships

of all States, whether coastal or not, shall enjoy
the right of innocent passage through the territorial
sea.
2. Passage means navigation through the territorial sea

for the purpose either of traversing that sea
without entering internal waters, or of proceeding
to internal waters, or of making for the high seas
from internal waters.
3. Passage includes stopping and anchoring, but only in

so far as the same are incidental to ordinary navigation
. " or b y
or are rendered necessary b y "f orce majeure
distress.
113
4. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial
to the peace, good order or security of the coastal
State ...•.... 7
Article 15
1. The coastal State must not hamper innocent passage through

the territorial sea.
2. The coastal State is required to give appropriate

publicity to any dangers to navigation, of which
it has knowledge, within its territorial sea.77
Article 16
1. The coastal State may take the necessary steps in its

territorial sea to prevent passage which is not innocent .•••
2. The coastal State may, without discrimination amongst

foreign ships, suspend temporarily in specific areas of
its territorial sea the innocent passage of foreign ships
if such suspension is essential for the protection of its
security. Such suspension shall take effect only after
having been duly published. 78
Article 19
1. The criminal jurisdiction of the coastal State should

not be exercised on board a foreign ship passing through
the territorial sea to arrest any person or to conduct
any investigation in connection with any crime committed
on board the ship during its passage, save only in the
following cases:
(a) If the consequences of the crime extend to the

coastal State; or
(b) If the crime is of a kind to disturb the peace

of the country or the good order of the
territorial sea; or
(c) If the assistance of the local authorities has

been requested by the captain of the ship or by
the consul of the country whose flag the ship flies;
or
76
Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, 29 April
1958, 2 UST 1606, TIAS No 5639, 516 UNTS 205.
77
Ibid.
78
Ibid. 114
(d) If it is necessary for the suppression of
illicit traffic in narcotic drugs. 79
Article 20
1. The coastal State should not stop or divert a foreign

ship passing through the territorial sea for the purpose
of exercising civil jurisdiction in relation to a person
on board the ship.
2. The coastal State may not levy execution against or

arrest the ship for the purpose of any civil proceedings,
save only in respect of obligations or liabilities assumed
or incurred by the ship itself in the course or for the
purpose of its voyage through the waters of the coastal
State. 80
If artificial floating islands are classified as vessels the
preceeding Articles would apply. Briefly stated, artificial floating
islands would be granted the right of innocent passage through the
territorial sea of a coastal State with certain minimum restrictions.
Finally, with regards to the "contiguous zone",81 Article 24 states:
In a zone of the high seas contiguous to its territorial

sea, the coastal State may exercise the control necessary
to:
(a) Prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal,

immigration or sanitary regulations within
its territory or territorial sea;
(b) Punish infringement of the above regulations

committed within its territory or territorial
sea. 82
Continuing with the assumption that artificial floating
islands are classified as vessels, the primary source for their
79
Ibid.
80
Ibid.
81
The contiguous zone is a zone which by the terms of the Convention
on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone may not extend beyond 12 miles
from the baselines drawn along the coast to define the territorial sea.
82 Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, 29 April
1958, 2 UST 1606, TIAS No 5639, 516 UNTS 205.
115
regulation on the high seas is the Convention on the High Seas.
Article 2 states:
The high seas being open to all nations, no State

may validly purport to subject any part of them to its
sovereignty. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under
the conditions laid down by these Articles and by the rules
of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both
for coastal and non-coastal States:
(1) Freedom of navigation;

(2) Freedom of fishing;
(3) Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipeS~nes;
(4) Freedom to fly over the high seas .....•.
As vessels, artificial floating islands would be required to sail under
the flag and registry of one State and, for all intent and purpose, be
subject to its exclusive jurisdiction on the high seas. Essentially
this means an artificial floating island is an extension of the flag
State on the high seas and free to operate 'without regulation from
other than the flag-State. Furthermore, depending on the specific
function of the artificial floating island it might seek the
laxity of regulation provided by a "flag-of-convenience" or "flag-of-
necessity". Registered under a flag-of-convenience, an artificial
floating island could minimize restrictions on its operation by heading
for the high seas and escape any further regulation.
The most recent transnational attempt to comprehensively regulate
the sea is the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS III). Presently awaiting ratification, the draft treaty makes
83
Convention on the High Seas, 29 April 1958, 2 UST 2312, TIAS
No 5200, 450 UNTS 82.
116
several small changes with regard to the regulation of vessels or,
artificial floating islands under the current assumption. The
treaty extends the territorial sea and contiguous zone and also
gives each coastal State a 200-mile EEZ. The right of innocent
passage is still however guaranteed within the territorial waters
of a coastal State. To reemphasize, innocent passage is defined
as the continuous and expeditious navigation through the territorial
sea. Article 19 of the draft treaty further defines the meaning
of innocent passage:
1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the

peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such
passage shall take place in conformity with this
Convention and with other rules of international law.
2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be

prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of
the coastal State, if in the territorial sea it engages
in any of the following activities:
(a) Any threat or use of force against the sovereignty,

territorial integrity or political independence
of the coastal State, or in any other manner
in violation of the principles of international
law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;
(b) Any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;
(c) Any act aimed at collecting information to the

prejudice of the defense or security of the
coastal State;
(d) Any act of propaganda aimed at collecting

information to the prejudice of the defense or
security of the coastal State;
(e) The launching, landing or taking on board of any

aircraft;
(f) The launching, landing or taking on board or any

military device;
117
(g) The embarking or disembarking of any commodity,
currency or person contrary to the customs,
fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulations of the
coastal State;
(h) Any act of willful and serious pollution, contrary

to this Convention;
(i) Any fishing activities;
(j) The carrying out of research or survey activities;
(k) Any act aimed at interfering with any systems

of communication or any other facilities or
installations of the coastal State;
(1) Any other activity not having a direct bearing

on passage. 84
This again would not pose a restriction on the operation of vessels
and artificial floating islands utilizing the territorial sea of a
coastal State for transit so long as the provisions in Article 19
were not violated.
Artificial Floating Islands as Structures
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1960 states that the
Constitution, laws and civil and political jurisdiction of the
United States are extended to the subsoil and seabed of the outer
continental shelf and to all artificial islands and fixed structures
erected thereon to the same extent as if the outer continental shelf
were an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction within a state. In
1969 the Supreme Court of the United States in Rodrique v Aetna
Casualty & Surety Co. supported the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.
84
Draft Convention of the Law of the Sea (Informal Text)
28 July-29 August 1980.
118
The case involved a wrongful death of a worker on a drilling rig
located on the outer continental shelf off the coast of Louisiana.
The court stated:
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act makes it clear

that federal law, supplemented by state law of the adjacent
State, is to be applied to these artificial islands as though
they were federal enclaves in an upland State ••.•..•
Congress decided that these artificial islands, though
surrounded by the high seas, were not themselves to be
considered within maritime jurisdiction. Thus the admiralty
action under the Death on the High Seas Act no more applies
to these accidents actually occurring on the islands than it
would to accidents occurring in an upland federal enclave
or on a natural island to which admiralty jurisdiction had
not been specifically extended. 85
The preceeding court decision dealt specifically with structures
in contact with the ocean floor. However, if an artificial floating
island were permanently moored to the ocean floor, it might be
classified as a structure.
In Cope v Vallette Dry-Dock Co. discussed earlier the Supreme
Court stated, "The fact that it floats on the water does not make
it a ship or vessel •••••• We think no case can be found which would
construe the terms (ship or vessel) to include a dry-dock, a floating
bridge, or meeting house, permanently moored or attached to a wharf. 1l86
This also indicates that artificial floating islands permanently moored
would be classified as structures. The primary distinction between
vessels and structures is their function:
85
Rodrique v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 395 U.S. 352,89 S. Ct.
1835, 23 L. Ed. 2d 360 (1969).
86
Cope v Vallette Dry-Dock Co., 119 U.S. 625, 7 S. Ct. 336,
30 L. Ed. 501 (1887).
119
The word 'structure' has arisen most often in the law
of the sea in regard to oil towers or rigs which rest on the
ocean floor and are not mobile. A floating-city ship
built on a free-floating platform would be distinguishable
from such towers and rigs. However, if the floating city
was stabilized for long periods of time in the same location,
it would not generally be involved in navigation or
transportation as a ship, and the argument could be made
that it was for all intents and purposes an installation
or structure. Its function would be that of a structure,
and that fact might be persuasive in court. Again, these
definitional distinctions under US law are not determinative
of international law, but indicative of the direction in
which international law may evolve. 87
The UNCLOS III drafty treaty, for the first time in history in a
law of the sea treaty, addresses the question of the regulation
of structures and artificial islands. Although not specifically
mentioning artificial floating islands, the following provisions could
be extended to include artificial floating islands that were
dynamically stabilized or permanently moored for long periods of time:
Article 56
In the EEZ, the coastal State has jurisdiction as

provided for in the relevant provisions of this Convention
with regard to the establishment and U§gof artificial
islands, installations and structures.
Article 60
In the EEZ, the coastal State shall have the exclusive

right to construct and to authorize and regulate the
construction, operation and use of artificial islands ••••••
The coastal State shall have:exclusive jurisdiction
over such artificial islands, installations and structures,
including jurisdiction with regard to customs, fiscal
health, safety and immigration regulations. 89
87
Kent Keith, "Floating Cities," Marine Policy, July 1977, pp. 196.
88
Draft Convention on the Law of the Sea (Informal Text)
28 July-29 August 1980.
89
Ibid.
120
Article 80
Article 60 applies mutatis mutandis to artificial

islands, installations and structures on the continental
shelf. 90
Article 87
The high seas are open to all States, whether coastal

or land-locked. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under
the conditions laid down by this convention and by other
rules of international law. It comprises inter alia, both
for coastal and land-locked States; Freedom to construct
artificial islands and other installations •••••• 91
Should artificial floating islands be classified as structures
their operation under the UNCLOS III convention would be closely
regulated within a coastal State~s territorial sea and EEZ. In the
case of a totally self-sufficient floating city employing mariculture
activities for its food supply for example, it is likely that it
will want to spend long periods of time in a resource-rich EEZ of
a coastal State. Therefore, under the present UNCLOS III draft
treaty, that floating city must comply with the regulations
determined by the coastal State; design standards, construction
techniques, pollution abatement and safety standards are just
a few examples.
Finally artificial floating islands might be classified as new
states.
90
Ibid.
91
Ibid.
121
Artificial Floating Islands as New States
A State has been defined as " •.••• an entity that has a defined
territory and population under the control of a government and that

92
engages in foreign relations." Lets assume that a floating city
permanently moored on the high seas had a population of twenty thousand,
an organized government, and engaged in foreign relations. Would
it not qualify as a new State? Article 12 of the Statute of the
International Court of Justice states:
The political existence of the State is independent

of recognition by other States. Even before being
recognized, the State has the right to defend its
integrity and independence, to provide for its preservation
and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as
it sees fit, to legislate concerning its interests, to
administer its services, and to determine the jurisdiction
and competence of its courts. The exersise of these
rights is limited only by the exercise of the rights of other
States in accordance with international law. 93
In addition, Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations states:
Membership in the United Nations is open to all

other peace-loving states which accept the obligations
contained in the present Charter and, in the judgement
of the Organization, are able and willing to carry
out these obligations.
It may be argued that an artificial floating island permanently
moored on the high seas does not meet the factual criteria to support
a finding of statehood by lacking actual land territory.
92
Noyes E. Leech, Covey T. Oliver, and Joseph Modeste Sweeney,
Cases and Materials on The International Legal System, (Mineola:
The Foundation Press, 1973), pp. 726.
93
2 U.S.T. 2394, 119 U.N.T.S. 3, as amended February 27, 1967,
21 U.S.T. 607.
122
This argument is indeed valid. However, there have been numerous
cases in international law where the factual criteria for
statehood were compromised.
For example, as a result of political compromise it was

agreed at the founding of the United Nations that two
of the federal states of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics would be admitted to the United Nations as
members: Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and
Ukranian Soviet Socialist Republic. This compromise
was agreed to by the founders of the United Nations
even though these units of the USSR did not freely
engage in international relations with the rest of the
world. 94
If in the past, compromises were made dealing with the factual
criteria for statehood, could it not be possible that permanently
moored artificial floating islands having a population under the
control of a government and that engage in foreign relations be
accepted as new States with international recognition.
Conclusion
Are artificial floating islands vessels, structures, or are
they States? The key to the problem and its appropriate response
is to be found in the nature of artificial floating islands themselves.
They don't completely fulfill the criteria for vessels, structures or
States under the current international legal system. Artificial
floating islands are indeed a new breed; a breed whose characterization
and strength will be evaluated in the years to come. For now, the
international legal response is one of "wait and see", awaiting the
first operational, full-scale artificial floating island.
94
Noyes E. Leech, Covey T. Oliver, and Joseph Modeste Sweeney,
Cases and Materials on The International Legal System, (Mineola:
The Foundation Press, 1973), pp. 731.
123
SUMMARY
Numerous coastal areas of the world are over-populated and
suffer from industrial pollution. Artificial floating islands appear
to be an answer to these, and a wide range of other issues.
Ocean floating-platform technology now makes it possible to
live and work on the surface of the ocean. Floating cities,
electrical power generation stations and mid-ocean basing for the
military are just a few of the possibilities for artificial
floating islands. By virtue of their great size, stability, storage
capacity, and long endurance station keeping capability, artificial
floating islands will be a mid-ocean facility of great military,
commercial, and scientific significance. Why then have they
not received the recognition they rightfully deserve?
The answer is no different than with any new, futuristic
technology. Within human nature there's always a bit of
skepticism and resistance to change. The age of artificial
floating islands is only now beginning. The opportunities
derived from artificial floating islands in the future are
limitless. Time is indeed the answer for ocean-floating platform,"
technology. As the concept gains regulatory and socia-economic
acceptance, artificial floating islands will indeed develope for
the betterment of mankind.
124
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Andrew, C.E. "Problems Presented by the Lake Washington Floating

Bridge." American Concrete Institute. Journal Proceedings, Vol. 37,
January 1941, App. 253-268; discussion, pp. 268-1 thru 268-4.
2. Atturio, J.M., Taylor, R.J., Valent, P.J. "Preliminary Selection

of Anchor Systems for OTEC." Civil Engineering Laboratory (NAVY).
March 1977.
3. "AQUAPOLIS." Japan Association for the International Ocean

Exposition, Okinawa. 1975.
4. Armstrong, Edward R. "Sea Station." U.S. Patent, No. 1,511,153,

October 7, 1924.
5. "ARPA Stable Floating Platform." Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

May 5, 1969.
6. Bowditch, Nathaniel. American Practical Navigator. Washington:

Defense Mapping Agency Hydrographic Center, 1977.
7. Brahtz, John F., ed. Ocean Engineering. New York: John Wiley, 1968.
8. Brebbia, C.A. and S. Walker. Dynamic Analysis of Offshore Structures.

London: Newnes-Butterworths, 1979.
9. Claus, Jurgen. Planet Meer. Cologne: Verleg M. der Mont Schauberg, 1972.
10. "Concrete Sphere Survives 10 Years at Depths of 975 Meters."

Sea Technology, (October 1982), pp. 52.
11. "Convention of the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone." 29 April 1958,
2 UST 1606, TIAS No 5639, 516 UNTS 205.
12. "Convention on the High Seas." 29 April 1958, 2 UST 2312, TIAS No 5200,
450 UNTS 82.
13. Cope v Vallette Dry-Dock Co., 119 U.S. 625, 7 S. Ct. 336, 30 L. Ed.
501 (1887).
14. Craven, John P. "Some Economic and Engineering Considerations for

a Floating, Coal-Fired 100rnW Power Plant." Ocean 75. 1975.
15. Craven, John P. "Cities of the Future: The Maritime Dimension."

American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1980.
16. Davis, D.A. The Concrete Semi-Submersible Platform. Port Hueneme:

Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, 1973.
17. "DELOS Mobile Instrumented Steady Sea Station." Undersea Technology,

(July 1968), pp. 16.
125
18. Del Rey, Lester. The Mysterious Sea. Philadepphia: Chilton, 1968.
19. Ellers, Fred S. "Advanced Offshore Oil Platforms." Scientific American.

Vol. 246, April 1982.
20. Fairchild, Adoniron. "Floating Support for Drilling Devices."

u.S. Patent, No. 496,729, May 2, 1893.
21. Fuller, Richard B. "Floating Cities." World. December 19, 1972.
22. Gaythwaite, John. The Marine Environment and Structural Design.

New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1981.
23. Haviland, Jean. "American Concrete Steamers of the First and Second
World Wars." American Neptune, (vol. 22, no. 3, 1962), pp. 157-183.
24. Healy, Nicholas J. and David J. Sharpe. Cases and Materials on

Admiralty. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1974.
25. Jaffney, Augustine. "Landing-Stage for Vessels and Land-Vehicles."

U.S. Patent, No. 204,977, March 23, 1920.
26. Keith, Kent. "Floating Cities." Marine Policy, July 1977.
27. Laque, Francis L. Marine Corrosion: Causes and Prevention. New York:
John Wiley, 1975.
28. Large, Arlen J. "MOHOLE Melee." The Wall Street Journal, January 19, 1967.
29. Leech, Noyes E., Covey T. Oliver, and Joseph Modeste Sweeney.
Cases and Materials on The International Legal System.
Mineola: The Foundation Press, 1973.
30. Lilly, Gordon G. "The MOHOLE Project." The Military Engineer, (July-
August, 1965), pp. 234-35.
31. Lindsey, Robert. "Pr6j ect MOHOLE Fallout: Sea-Going Tracking Stations."
Aerospace Technology, (May 6, 1965), pp. 34-35.
32. Mann, Charles F.A. "A Bridge That Floats." Scientific American,
(February 1940), pp. 75-7.
33. "Marine Fouling and its Prevention." Woods Hole Oceanographic

Institution, Annapolis: United States Naval Institute, 1952.
34. Mcquade, Walter. "Urban Expansion Takes to the Water." Fortune.

September 1969.
35. Mero, John L. The Mineral Resources of the Sea. Ansterdam: Elsevier, 1965.
36. "MOHOLE: The Project That Went Awry(III)." Science, (January 24, 1964),
pp. 115-7, 334-7.
37. Munske, Richard E. "Progress on MOHOLE." Undersea Technology,

(December 1963), pp. 5, 16-7.
126
38. Niblock, Robert W. "Oil Companies To Use MOHOLE Technology."
Technology Week, (April 17, 1967), pp. 24-5.
39. Nunn, Robert R. "New Concepts for Deep Water Production." Ocean Industry.
Vol. 3, No.9, September 1968.
40. Rawson, K.J., and E.C. Tupper. Basic Ship Theory. New York: Longman, 1977.
41. Rodrique v Aetna Cas. Sur. Co., 395 U.S. 352, 89 S. Ct. 1835,
23 L. Ed. 2d 360 (1969).
42. Roth, Leland M. A Concise History of American Architecture. New York:

Harper & Row, 1979.
43. Sadao, Shoj i. "Buckminster Fuller's Floating City." The Futurist.

February 1969.
44. Sandiford, Roberto. "Aerodromes on the Open Seas." Air Law Review, 1934.
45. Spiess, Fred N. "Vehicle and Mobile Structures." Ocean Engineering.

Ed. John F. Brahtz. New York: John Wiley, 1968.
46. "Stationary Floating Ocean Platforms." Ocean Engineering. Washington:

National Technical Information Service. January 1975.
47. Trillo, Robert L., ed. Jane's Ocean Technology. 4th ed. New York:
Franklin Watts, 1979-1980.
48. Wiegel, Robert L. Oceanographical Engineering. Englewood Cliffs:

Prentice-Hall, 1964.
49. Yasso, Warren E. Oceanography. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
1965.
127
APPENDIX (1)
CHRONOLOGY OF FLOATING RIGS, 1953-1968

--_._',
011_'_- ___ --
-_._-- IICAL
........ _ "WJTI.
....
CIIlT!lll." _
~'
m.~·1
lICCUI.l.AlIl _ _ .......
CIIIeoG IICT_
_.TMl·_ _
.
......
110I'", '-'- r
MJl.TMl._~_
lt53 lt55 Its. 1t58

t----qr----_
.••.
,.!It
@l1-
,...
._&.CA._
.
' _ W,fft ID. '" _
11.·_ _1
j m"c.~ ......."
CIU._
!.VATA ..~.•
I / rx ~
- "
~
I:
, I
'""' _.•...
n...... I............
"---
UU
_.•...
"-.
"'"
_.•...
'913
j--
! ,.
....,
"12.
_ _ "DlSCOVEIl"."
- a l "DaUl DIlIl.U."
V·SHAN: TUIlfll!T _NG
11II110 T~TfJnI
~
1 / <;1
~
II
! r " I I
-' I
H ~ h, H "'--1 -,
n ~ ...... ,.
, .'
:I " i
I
/U'"
:: ~
i
(,-, ,.....
- --
1913
..
-"~ ..
]
i
I
-.....
-
-_.-
J
1914
"1I1lCO US" _til "ocu. lIUU."
TIIAHGULAR lIJ\.T1P!.£
\KAPE LDNGInIU*L t'lULLS
It IS
_ ""'...._
- - " 0 _ PmIT_
OIALU_.-
,
, ...
128
APPENDIX (2)
MAJOR RIG MISHAPS
-'.r
I. Celco "S-44"
... T,pe 01.,.
Subm.lllb'~_d ponlDolII
T,pe Of .llII8p
Damilld by blowout Ind lir. in Gull III••llico-feptir.d Ind put btck InlD .rwica.
••
1156
Am.rlcln Tidellnds "101"
smco "Ri, 22"
Submillibl~i ....d ponlDolII
Subm.rsible-roctsStd pontoons
Cepllz.d while mowin, lIll • 'lICItion In 81111 III••lico-ritllt.d Ind put btck "'Ill . . . . .
Cepsiz.d .t shipy.rd-ritllt.d .nd put inlll servic•.
1957 Royel/Dutch Sh.1I "Q.llr Ri, No. I" Jtck·up-squ.r.I.,s (b.rllS lor Brok.n up by • sudd.n storm whil' preptrin,lIl move in P.rsi.n Gull-not ..Ivapd.
tr.nsport)
1957 GI.sscock Drillin, Co. "Mr. Gus I" Jtck·up-m.t + cylindrlCllleas Tipped over whil' prep.rin,1Il move in Gull 01 Mexico-lower hull ..Ivalld.
1157 DHpwlter "No.2" Jtck·up-tri.n,ul.r It,s CoII.psed while drill;n, in Gull 01M'lico-Slllva,ed but not returned III.rvice.
1957 John W. Mocom "Ed M.lloy" Submersibl&-ilrydock
. Drill b.rll destroyed by Hurrielne AUdrey. Drydock "'VI&ec! but not r.turned III. . . . .
1858 Underw.ter Gis Developers J.ck·up-m.t Cepsized while bein, tow.d IIIfirst loc.tion in like Erie-not ..Iv,"d.
"Tr.nsl.ke NO.3"
lISt Trlns·Gull "No. 10" Jack·up-cylindriellle,s Tipped over while preplrin, III move in Gull 01 Melico-not ..IVI&ec!.
1159 Readin, Ind Bites "C. E. Thornton" Jack·up-triln,ular Ie,s D.ml,e~ by blowout Ind fire in Persiln GUIl-replired Ind returned III.rvice.
1!16O ZlpIII Oft·Shore "Noll 2" Bar,e (YF) Belched durin, storm in Bay 01Cempeche while movin, to new location-not Slivalld.
1961 Offshore Co. "No. 55" Jtck·up-squlre Ie,s Beached in British Honduras durin, Hurriclne Hlttie while bein,lIlwed lrom Trinidld ID U.s.-
replired Ind returned to .rvice.
1961 Louisilnl Delli "Delli" Submersible-bottles Dlml,ed by hurriCine in Gulf01 Melico-repaired Ind returned III.rvice.
19&2 Globll Mlrine "SM·!" Bar,e (LSM) Sunk by storm while on location lIll Slnll Barberi, Celif.-not Sllvl,ed.
1964 R"din, Ind Bites "C. P. Baker" Bar,e (Cillmarln·type) Turned eWer end·for·.nd durin, blowout Ind fire in Gull 01MexicO-not ..Ivalld.
1964 Blue Wlter "Ri, No. I" S.mi·submersible Ceplized .nd ..nk in Hurrielne Hildt-not ..Iva,ed.
1965 Penrod "Ri, 52" Jtck·up-mlt Cepsiz.d while movin, on 1000tion in Gult 01 Mexico--broken up durin, Hurrielne Betsy-not
.. Iva,ed.
1965 ROYIl/Dutch Shell "Orient Elplorer" Jtc~·up-cylindricil leiS Dlmilld in Mediterrlnean Sea while under tow trom Borneo to Enllind-rep.ired Ind retumed
. to service.
1965 SNAM·SAIPEM "PI,uro" Jtck·up-tr;lnlullr leiS Destroyed by blowout Ind fire in Adriltic Sea-not Slivaled.
1965 Marlin DrillingCo. "Mlrlin NO.3" Jlck·up-m.t Pirtillly submerled while movinl to loc.tion in Gulf 01 Mexico-replired Ind returned ID ttrvice.
1965 ZIPIII Off·Shore "Mlverick '" J.ck·up-trilnlullr leiS Lost in HurriCine Betsy-not ..Ival'd.
1965 ROYll/Dutch Shell "Triton" Jack·up-cylindrielllelS Destroyed by blowout Ind fire in Nillria-not ..Ivaled.
1965 ROYII/Dutch Shell "Bruy.rd" Semi,submersible Brake up in South Chinl sel wIIi1e under tow-not ..Iva,ed.
1965 Comp.,nie Generll D'[quipments Jack·up-cylindrielileis CoIIIPsed in North Sea willie preparinl to move-not ..Iva,ed.
"sel Gem"
1966 CEP"Rollr Butin" Jlck·up-cylindricallels Tipped over lIter movinl On location oil Cemeroun-not SilvaI'd.
1966 Golden line "Mercury" Bar,e (YF) Clpsized Ind .. nk durin, storm orr TUlpln. Mellco-not salViled.
1968 ZIPI~ Orr·Shore "Chlparrll" Jack·up-trilnlullr leiS Lost three leiS durin, storm in Gull 01 Mexicowhile under tow to lilly-repaired Ind fllturned
to .rvice.
1968 OOECO "Ocean Prince" Semi'submersible Destroyed while sittinl on bottom in North Sea-not salvalld.
1968 Dililyn "Julie Ann" Jeck·up-tri.nlullr leiS S.nk while under tow durinl storm in Gull 01 Mexico-not sa1va,ed.
1968 Dresser Offshore"Dresser II" Jlck·up-cylindricallels Tipped DVlr on loc.tion-not salvaled.
129
APPEND IX (3)
Summary of Plant/Site Interface Parameters
for Floating Nuclear Plants

Site Envelope
The structures position the plant. provide a
The Site Envelope is a group of limits and condi- means of discharging heated water away from the
tions that any and all potential FNP sites must plants. and a means of transmitting the electri-
meet. If the potential site does not meet, or cal energy generated.
cannot feasibly and economically be altered to
meet the envelope requirements, then it is not 1. The Breakwater (protective structures)
suitable for FNP siting.
The breakwater must reduce wave motion
Plant Environmental Conditions inside the basin to a level such that design
basis plant accelerations and angular dis-
The envelope specifies limiting environmental placements are not exceeded. It must protect
conditions in which the FNP can be located. the plant from ship collision. prevent the
Included in this category are: entry of floating petroleum. chemicals. bulk
cargo or debris into the basin. restrict
Maximum and Minimum Water Depth access of unauthorized personnel and vessels.
Maximum and Minimum Water Temperature and provide a path for unrestricted water
Minimum Air Temperature flow to plant intakes. and at the same time
Minimum Sea Bottom Bearing Strength prevent fish entrapment.
Maximum Seismic Motion
Maximum Wave Induced Plant Motion 2. Mooring System
Maximum Rainfall Rate
Maximum Winds (Operating and Design Basis) .The mooring system requirements include:
Atmospheric Diffusion Conditions
Meteorological Monitoring Programs Restricting plant horizontal motion to
Combinations of Conditions prevent plant contact with catchment
basin and breakwater. and to ensure
Site Hazards transmission line integrity.
The envelope specifies that potential FNP sites Reducing the horizontal seismic accelera-
should be selected so that potential hazards to tion at the plant to acceptable values.
the plant are minimized. The hazards may be
minimized by engineered means or by sufficient Allowing vertical plant motion to accom-
reduction of the probability of a given hazard's modate basin water depth changes associ-
occurrence, or by a combination of both. ated with tides. storm surges waves and
tsunami.
The hazards considered under the envelope include:
Other Interface Requirements
Aircraft Crash
Explosion in the Vicinity of the Plant Other requirements that are imposed upon the
Release of Cloud of Flammable Vapor in the site structures designers. by the FNP design
Vicinity of the Plants include the following:
Release of Cloud of Toxic Vapor in the Vicin-
ity of the Plants 1. Circulating Water Catchment and Discharge
Piping
The last three of the above are assumed to be
from a ship collision in the vicinity of the Circulating water is discharged from the
site. For riverine or onshore sites, the proba- plant to a concrete catchment mounted on the
bilities of land transportation accidents should basin bottom via inverted "l" shaped dis-
be considered in addition to or in lieu of ship charge pipes. The clearances between the
collisions. plant, the discharge piping. and the catch-
ment is designated in this interface require-
Structures IIlent.
2. Electrical Connection to the Transmission
The envelope requires that the design of site System
structures (the breakwater or other protective
works, the mooring system, the circulating This requirement specifies the requirements
water catchment and outfall. and the electrical for connections between the FNP and the
transmission structures) be such that the plant transmission system including voltage. power
will not exceed any design basis parameters transmitted. number of circuits. spares. and
during its lifetime. AEC Design Criteria to be followed in the
design.
The structures serve to protect the plants from
hazards such as wave damage, excessive accelera- 3. Miscellaneous Interface Requirements include
tions and angular displacements, and ship colli- those concerning:
sion. Cathodic Protection
Plant Access
Communications
130 Security
Emergency Plans
Technical Specifications

Artificial Floating Islands - Cities of The Future PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artificial Floating Islands - Cities of The Future PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artificial Floating Islands - Cities of The Future PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Rhode Island

Artificial Floating Islands: Cities of the Future

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/ma_etds

CITIES OF THE FUTURE

GMA 652: Marine Affairs Seminar

Professor Gerald Krausse

LIST OF TABLES............................................ vii

1. HISTORICAL REVIEW OF OCEAN PLATFORMS................. 2

Columnar or Elevated Platforms............... 25

Advantages and Disadvantages................. 32

Advantages and Disadvantages................. 50

Deterioration Prevention and Construction

3. APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLANDS.......... 64

Cities of the Future......................... 64

Floating Coal-Fired Power Plant................... 84

Floating Nuclear Power Plant...................... 88

Mid-Ocean Basing Systems.......................... 103

4. ARTIFICIAL FLOATING ISLANDS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 110

Artificial Floating Islands as Ships

Artificial Floating Islands as Structures .•....... 118

Artificial Floating Islands as New States 122

S~Y. •••••••••• •• •••••• •••••••••• •• •••• ••••••••••••••• • 124

1. Floating Support for Drilling Devices....................... 3

2. Landing Stage for Vessels and Land Vehicles................. 4

4. Lake Washington Floating Bridge............................. 7

8. Planned Core Drilling Sites of MOHOLE....................... 15

10. MOHOLE Pro j ec t. • . . • . • . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . . • . • • . 18

11. DELOS Stable Ocean Platform................................. 19

12. Elevated Platform with Circular Cylindrical Legs............ 26

13. ARPA-Floating Platform...................................... 27

14. Bottle-Shaped Element....................................... 29

15. Wave Tank Test Model for Columnar Platform.................. 29

16. Semi-Submersible Configuration.............................. 31

17. 1/10 Scale Semi-Submersible Test Model...................... 33

18. 1/10 Scale Semi-Submersible Test Model...................... 34

19. Four Possible Barge Configurations.......................... 36

20. Flat Barge Configuration.................................... 37

21. Trimaran Barge Platform..................................... 39

22. Flippable Barge............................................. 40

23. Flippable Barge............................................. 41

24. Example of Possible Large Platform Configuration

25. Scripps-ARPA Flippable Barge Concept........................ 43

26. Barge Train Speed of Advance vs Sea State Condition......... 45

27. Barge Concept for Advanced Base Battle Group

28. Tension-Leg Platform Design................................. 48

29. Method of Construction for the Hutton Tension-Leg Platform.. 49

30. Examples of Excessive Fouling............................... 53

31. Electrolytic Corrosion...................................... 55

32. Choice of Coatings for Different Zones of Offshore .

33. Various Zones on Marine Structures Where Coatings are

34. Diagram of Automated Cathodic Protection Control System.... 56

35. Composite Diagram of Ice Forces............................ 57

36. Three Traditional Methods of Building on Water............. 66

37. United States Pavilion, Montreal Expo...................... 68

38. Buckminster Fuller's Geodesic Dome Concept Over

39. Buckminster Fuller Shows His Floating City to U.S.

40. Buckminster Fuller's Floating City......................... 71

41. Paola Soleri's Beehive Concept for a Floating City......... 76