| ||||
|
#16
| ||||
| ||||
| Then you probably wont be able to help me, but thanks for replying. -Tom |
|
#17
| ||||
| ||||
| Tom if you offer him lines, he loses the whole point of the exercise, not to mention the race with the design you've posted. Some light reading and simple math will get him in the ball park, but nurse maiding him through the problem solving aspect, seems self defeating to say the least. Tad has answered the basic questions of hull form and stability. Assuming the OP has sufficient math skills to figure out about how much boat it will take to support his 6.6 pounds of cargo, building materials and propulsion, they can extrapolate a reasonable set of lines from what's commonly known. A displacement form is the obvious choice, likely considering the supplied propulsion unit will pretty much suck. So, the usual applies, do a weight study and work with what you have (power) for a hull shape. |
|
#18
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
With electrical motors, more power = more battery weight. Since the course is so short, as a long time fan of electric slot cars, battery longevity and speed will be a huge part of the success formulae. The first question is - does the mandatory ballast have to be steel ? If not steel, then far better to make it all as batteries ( probably rechargeable) ,so you have an enormous power source. I would then run say 4 electric motors, at a rate that will last the 100 metres, flat out. If it has to be steel, and you have to have batteries as extra - you could build the steel sheet with a matching copper or zinc sheet, held in a plastic or epoxy container, separated by electrolytic paste - in effect creating a reserve of power to achieve the same thing. It would not be as efficient as lead batteries, but maybe it would give you an 'edge'. Check out some options on the internet about how to incorporate steel in a battery. It doesnt have to be long lived. |
|
#19
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Regarding the maneuverability, I believe it will be extremely sluggish. The underwater body will oppose a big resistance to turning moments and the rudder appears to be way to small to have any authority worth talking about. You need to define maneuverability goals first, imho, and then design the rudder accordingly. Seeing all that draft, I'd suggest you to not leave the helm in Capt. Schettino's hands. ![]() Cheers Last edited by daiquiri : 02-01-2012 at 06:46 AM. |
|
#20
| |||
| |||
| I don't know but I do have a 122cm LOA X 11cm draft model that is very similar ready for towing tests as soon as a tow boat is ready. One major problem with this concept as a container or bulk carrier is that it will not be stable unless well loaded and this will pose a problem at the dock. Loading and offloading will have to be coordinated to take this into account.
__________________ Tom Lathrop |
|
#21
| |||
| |||
| I think poorly. Too much wetted surface for good speed. The stability might work. but remember that a vessel rolls about the CG, so you will be dipping the sponsons all the time which will degrade both speed and maneuverability. I think maneuerability would be horrible, not only is the rudder too small compared to the projected area as daiquiri pointed out, but it is also too low compared to the CG. Rudder force will cause a large heeling moment, which will again cause dipping of the sponsons. IMHO, if you want to go with this design, you should raise the prop shaft and rudder area.
__________________ A vessel is nothing but a bunch of opinions and compromises held together by the faith of the builders and engineers that they did it correctly. Therefor the only thing a Naval Architect has to sell is his opinion. |
|
#22
| ||||
| ||||
|
__________________ Hoyt "Lightning is very selective and will not strike crap." Wynand N "We Redistribute World's Wealth By Climate Policy" UN IPCC Official |
|
#23
| ||||
| ||||
| Thank you all. I agree entirely with all your comments. Sorry about the picture quality, I've tried many angles, this is the best I could do. He went with a conventional, FreeShip design. I was hoping to evolve some ideas into a winning hull but we are out of time. He cut the sections today. The rudder, prop, motor, battery, R/C gear is all standard for the whole nation as is the 3 kg above-water-line payload and 3 kg ballast plate. He's got loads of thrust from the video I've seen so hull speed will be hull speed, He'll get points in maneuverability, stability, creativity, and detailing/finish. Cheers, thanks again for your input. -Tom |
|
#24
| ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
electric/solar boats in Canberra a few years ago. One winning entrant (an Australian ex-naval commnader) modified an existing long narrow dinghy by changing from a cut-off transom stern to a canoe stern, and using the maximum allowable weight in lead-acid batteries placed low down. |
|
#25
| ||||
| ||||
| So, the kid did okay. I'll let him tell you all about it but here are some pictures from the event last week. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_vfz...78q6QdQsIeb0=* and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfNEG...ture=youtu.be* -Tom P.S. The faster boat works out to about 2.4 knots over the 50 m course shown. And, they ended up over 8 kg displacement. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Design competition | dskira | Boat Design | 105 | 01-18-2010 09:18 AM |
| Design competition poll | dskira | Boat Design | 24 | 12-02-2009 06:15 PM |
| Life Jacket Design Competition | brian eiland | Projects & Proposals | 2 | 05-23-2006 11:41 AM |
| Metalboatsociety design competition | MarkC | Metal Boat Building | 0 | 01-21-2006 06:33 AM |
| Collaborative Design / Yacht Design Competition (Idea Stage) | Jeff | Education | 0 | 03-16-2002 02:34 PM |