How the Ark was ventilated.

[OldWiseGuy]

The problem of ventilation has been declared one of the insurmountable problems the ark would face by skeptics. They state that it would take modern technology to accomplish this necessary function. Au Contrare. All that was needed was outlet vents for hot, moist air and inlet vents for cool fresh air. The lighter warm air is displaced by heavier cool air discharged at the bottom level of the ark. No need for a degree in HVAC.

 

[Delphiki]

The problem of ventilation has been declared one of the insurmountable problems the ark would face by skeptics. They state that it would take modern technology to accomplish this necessary function. Au Contrare. All that was needed was outlet vents for hot, moist air and inlet vents for cool fresh air. The lighter warm air is displaced by heavier cool air discharged at the bottom level of the ark. No need for a degree in HVAC.

However, as you (I think it was either you or AV) suggested, much of the ark would have been under water, floating, but with the majority of it beneath the surface. You can have venting at the top, but any lower vents below surface would contribute to the thing sinking more rapidly. It would vent more water than air. If the lower vents were above the surface, then they aren't really venting much at all.... these would be called windows.

Speaking of windows, God only instructed Noah to build one.

Gen 6"16 - “You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above”

Additional windows and vents would be the invention of the imaginative reader, as they aren't mentioned in the bible.

In order for the kind of ventilation you're talking about to work, floor-level vents (the ones drawing in the cool air) need to be unobstructed, especially from water.

 

[Tiberius]

A larger problem is how the ark remained sea-worthy. A wooden vessel of that size would have broken apart in even a small swell.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

However, as you (I think it was either you or AV) suggested, much of the ark would have been under water, floating, but with the majority of it beneath the surface. You can have venting at the top, but any lower vents below surface would contribute to the thing sinking more rapidly. It would vent more water than air. If the lower vents were above the surface, then they aren't really venting much at all.... these would be called windows.

Speaking of windows, God only instructed Noah to build one.

Gen 6"16 - “You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above”

Additional windows and vents would be the invention of the imaginative reader, as they aren't mentioned in the bible.

In order for the kind of ventilation you're talking about to work, floor-level vents (the ones drawing in the cool air) need to be unobstructed, especially from water.

The fresh air inlet vents would also have been on the top of the ark. All that is needed is an array of plenums that reach from the top to the bottom of the ark that separate the warm and cool airflows. The reader is free to flesh out the ark's design. If the literal story is followed there would be no way to enter the ark as the door in the 'side' would be too high to reach. We have to add a ramp or stairs, as well as a myriad of other construction details omitted from the very brief bible account. Also, a window is not a vent (although it can be).

 

[cerad]

So where exactly does this "cooler air" come from? Keep in mind that simple calculations show that during during the time it was actually raining, outside temperatures would have been many thousands of degrees.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

A larger problem is how the ark remained sea-worthy. A wooden vessel of that size would have broken apart in even a small swell.

A 'structure' of that size and weight would be unaffected by even large swells. It would be able to absorb huge amounts of energy released against it.

 

[cerad]

A 'structure' of that size and weight would be unaffected by even large swells. It would be able to absorb huge amounts of energy released against it.

Ever been on a ship? I have personally puked my guts out while serving on board aircraft carriers. Even the largest ships are severely impacted by ocean swells.

 

[Delphiki]

The fresh air inlet vents would also have been on the top of the ark. All that is needed is an array of plenums that reach from the top to the bottom of the ark that separate the warm and cool airflows. The reader is free to flesh out the ark's design. If the literal story is followed there would be no way to enter the ark as the door in the 'side' would be too high to reach. We have to add a ramp or stairs, as well as a myriad of other construction details omitted from the very brief bible account. Also, a window is not a vent (although it can be).

Still wouidn't work. The air would simply stagnate. Warm air would rise through the plenums just as much as it would in the rooms inside. You would need some sort of fan or pump to encourage air flow... Otherwise, we'd have free-energy machines which are little more than pinwheels in boxes.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Ever been on a ship? I have personally puked my guts out while serving on board aircraft carriers. Even the largest ships are severely impacted by ocean swells.

The ark was carried on a massive flood, not ocean currents as we know them today. Picture a whitewater raft going down the Colorado River. If it stays with the current even a flimsey craft survives. Same with a directional flood, which would have carried the ark in one direction for perhaps hundreds of miles. At the location of its grounding on Ararat flows of water coming from different directions would have met, absorbing each others energy.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Still wouidn't work. The air would simply stagnate. Warm air would rise through the plenums just as much as it would in the rooms inside. You would need some sort of fan or pump to encourage air flow... Otherwise, we'd have free-energy machines which are little more than pinwheels in boxes.

The greater the difference in density of the two air masses the more effective the system becomes, especially in a tall structure where you have the chimney effect. I access the roof of my apartment building through a 30 by 30 inch hatchway, and even on a mild day the uprush of warm air from under the roof is powerful, and this from just slightly cooler air coming in from the soffits just a few feet below. I have tossed hay bales down a barn hay chute with the same result. The chaff blows up into your face even on a mild summer day. As the seawater would cool the air around the ark there would easily be enough difference for the system to perform nicely.

 

[MacNeil, D.]

You have a "ship" that's going to break apart the moment it starts floating, and you're worried about how to ventilate it?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You have a "ship" that's going to break apart the moment it starts floating, and you're worried about how to ventilate it?

I was responding to someone who said it couldn't be ventilated. Was that you?

 

[MacNeil, D.]

I was responding to someone who said it couldn't be ventilated. Was that you?

Not me, I don't know why this would be a problem.

Use this. A perfectly good ventilator.

 

[cerad]

The ark was carried on a massive flood, not ocean currents as we know them today. Picture a whitewater raft going down the Colorado River. If it stays with the current even a flimsey craft survives. Same with a directional flood, which would have carried the ark in one direction for perhaps hundreds of miles. At the location of its grounding on Ararat flows of water coming from different directions would have met, absorbing each others energy.

A directional world wide flood? This just keeps getting better and better.

Maybe we should get get back to the thread topic before we gently float completely out of the land of reality.

Let's start with a basic question: How much heat will need to be removed on a daily basis?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Not me, I don't know why this would be a problem.

Use this. A perfectly good ventilator.

This might be a small problem while it is raining several feet an hour for 40 days and 40 nights. But oldwiseguy has pointed out that this is a 3 story structure and claimed that it was full in all kinds of internal bracing in a "honycomb" or cubical structure and of course you need cages of some kind for thousands of animals so I think internal air flow will be pretty restricted, especially on the lower decks and you have to deal with the waste products from all those animals in 100% humidity. You are right though, once the ark breaks apart ventillation will not be a problem and that would happen pretty quickly.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

A directional world wide flood? This just keeps getting better and better.

Maybe we should get get back to the thread topic before we gently float completely out of the land of reality.

Let's start with a basic question: How much heat will need to be removed on a daily basis?

Not only heat but CO2, methane, ammonia and hydrogen sulfide.
http://www.farmsafety.ca/factsheets/manure_gas.pdf

 

[MacNeil, D.]

The ark was carried on a massive flood, not ocean currents as we know them today. Picture a whitewater raft going down the Colorado River. If it stays with the current even a flimsey craft survives. Same with a directional flood, which would have carried the ark in one direction for perhaps hundreds of miles. At the location of its grounding on Ararat flows of water coming from different directions would have met, absorbing each others energy.

A five hundred foot wooden box would be even less stable in flood turbulence because it would pitch, roll and yaw and not have the structural strength to maintain intact or even damaged stability. A five hundred foot wooden box is not analogous to a 30 foot boat. And a current would have nothing to do with why a box that big would hog and/or sag and break apart, a challenge which you refuse to address.

 

[lucaspa]

The ark was carried on a massive flood, not ocean currents as we know them today. Picture a whitewater raft going down the Colorado River. If it stays with the current even a flimsey craft survives. Same with a directional flood, which would have carried the ark in one direction for perhaps hundreds of miles. At the location of its grounding on Ararat flows of water coming from different directions would have met, absorbing each others energy.

No, flimsy rafts are torn apart even in the current. You need a very sturdy raft. But structural strength becomes more difficult the larger the craft. So what can be "sturdy" to a raft that is 4 feet by 4 feet is not sturdy when you have a very large craft.

Of course, I wonder why you are expending such effort when there is so much evidence contradicting a world-wide flood. There simply never was such a flood. Something recognized by scientists and Christians (who were the same thing) by 1831.

 

[MacNeil, D.]

Not only heat but CO2, methane, ammonia and hydrogen sulfide.
http://www.farmsafety.ca/factsheets/manure_gas.pdf

Are you saying Ye Arke would smell like fermenting socks?

 

[Gracchus]

A 'structure' of that size and weight would be unaffected by even large swells. It would be able to absorb huge amounts of energy released against it.

And where did you learn nautical engineering?
Very large wooden ships have been built. They respond to swells by "hogging" that is, as they pass over a swell the bow and stern drop, and as they pass over a trough they "sag", which is to say that the bow and stern rise. Then the bow will be roling one way and the stern another. Planks twist and buckle. The seams work open even in calm seas, so that the pumps have to keep going constantly and even in moderately rough seas they take on so much water as to be in constant danger of sinking.