stability: length vs. width

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by river runner, Nov 11, 2011.

  1. river runner
    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 172
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 91
    Location: Colorado

    river runner baker

    What just happened?
    Increasing the LWL and the beam both increase stability, but what affects stability more? Does increasing LWL 10% incrase stability the same amount as increaing beam 10%?
     
  2. Easy Rider
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 920
    Likes: 46, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 732
    Location: NW Washington State USA

    Easy Rider Senior Member

    Too many variables but something to keep in mind is that fullness in the ends have a profound effect on stability what ever B/L ratio. Full ends are probably more beneficial to long narrow boats generally speaking.
     
  3. DCockey
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 5,229
    Likes: 634, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 1485
    Location: Midcoast Maine

    DCockey Senior Member

    Assuming the hull form stays the same and the changes in length and/or beam are made by stretching, beam has the greater effect.
     
  4. tom28571
    Joined: Dec 2001
    Posts: 2,474
    Likes: 117, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1728
    Location: Oriental, NC

    tom28571 Senior Member

    Among other things, it depends on the L/B ratio you start with. Such a nebulous question cannot be answered. Think about your questions a bit before sending them out.
     
  5. river runner
    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 172
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 91
    Location: Colorado

    river runner baker

    Hey Tom, I'm a baker in a grocery store, not an NA or ME. You might cut me some slack.
    I've been working on a river dory design that is, currently, about 7 feet wide and a waterline length of 17 feet. I was trying to find out if I wanted to change these dimensions and the info I asked for would help make this decision.
     
  6. tom28571
    Joined: Dec 2001
    Posts: 2,474
    Likes: 117, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1728
    Location: Oriental, NC

    tom28571 Senior Member

    You might get some more slack if you asked more complete questions. Now you fill in the beam and length you are starting with. Those are absolutely minimum starting points. If you think I am being harsh, you should have asked that original question of my mentor. Now, is that the waterline beam or the max beam?
     
  7. river runner
    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 172
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 91
    Location: Colorado

    river runner baker

    That would be maximum beam, Tom. Not sure what the waterline beam would be at this point. I'm attaching a rendering of the design, if that helps. I don't need an exact answer, just enought information to point me in one direction or another or tell me I'm on the right track.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 7,773
    Likes: 1,678, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    One assumes you’re talking about Transverse stability?

    The GZ curve, which defines the amount of stability (statical) that you have, is governed by the GM of the boat. So what affects the GM? GM is found by obtaining the BM of the vessel which si found from

    BM = I/V

    I is the inertia of the waterplane area and V = volume of the vessel.

    I = LB^3/12, thus increasing the beam, increases the I, which increases BM, which, assuming the KG remains the same, increases the GM and thus, increases the GZ, the righting lever.

    Simply:- dGM = 2BM.(dB/B)

    dGM = change in GM
    dB = change in beam

    The effects are shown here:

    stability - beam increase.jpg

    Curve A is orginal hull. Curve B, is an increase in beam. Curve C, is original hull, but increase in freeboard.

    If you’re talking about longitudinal stability (or trim), the formulas are the same, except the axis of rotation are different. BUT, the stability longitudinally is always greater than transverse. The BM(L) of a vessel is very close to the GM(L), and can be used as a rough approximation of stability. Thus we always refer to stability in the transverse sense, very rarely longitudinally.

    Thus, since transverse stability is more sensitive to minor changes than longitudinal, increasing the beam has the greater effect.
     
  9. river runner
    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 172
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 91
    Location: Colorado

    river runner baker

    Thanks, guys. I had always assumed that width had the greater affect, but I'd recently read something that put that into question. I wanted to be sure, in case I build another boat of my own design.
    There seemed to be some thought that this conclusion was dependent on starting dimensions, but realistically, would a sane boat ever have starting dimensions where increasing length would have a greater effect on stability than increasing width?
     
  10. river runner
    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 172
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 91
    Location: Colorado

    river runner baker

    I'm looking at AdHoc's graph and it looks like it is saying that to prevent capsize, you would be better off increasing freeboard than increasing width. True?
     
  11. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 7,773
    Likes: 1,678, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    It really depends upon the SOR of your boat and where you intend to use it, that shall dictate your design.
     
  12. tom28571
    Joined: Dec 2001
    Posts: 2,474
    Likes: 117, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1728
    Location: Oriental, NC

    tom28571 Senior Member

    I'm a bit late in getting back river runner but no need to confuse with more math or suppositions. Ad hoc's post gives the groundwork. All of the principle dimensions have an effect on stability in one plane or another although we generally think of lateral stability as most important.
     
  13. DCockey
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 5,229
    Likes: 634, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 1485
    Location: Midcoast Maine

    DCockey Senior Member

    It depends on the amount freeboard is increased versus the amount beam is increased, which in turn depends on the requirements and constraints.
     
  14. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 16,790
    Likes: 1,714, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    More freeboard will give you higher angle of positive stability (when the boat can recover from heeling over) and a higher maximum angle of flooding ( the boat can heel over more without flooding. More beam will give you more initial stability.
     

  15. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 7,773
    Likes: 1,678, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    riverrunner

    Once you have looked at your SOR, as i noted above, you need to be careful. Since, increasing the freeboard, does as Gonzo and the graph shows. This assumes all things equal. But rarely is that the case in design.

    The downside to increasing the freeboard is the obvious one, always over looked too. If the majority of your heavy equipment is higher up, at or above main deck, then all you're doing is moving the KG up, which would lower the GZ, righting arm. So whilst curve C looks like the ticket, you can shoot yourself in the foot simply because the rise in overall KG negates the benefits shown by curve C.

    Thus best investigate, via your SOR what you really want, rather than assumptions. The graphs i posted are indicative, as information. But you really need to establish the GZ curve for your design. One assumes you are 'designing' using electronic means, if so, it would be simple to dump the lines into a hydrostatic stability suit of programs for a quick check. Then see what GZ you have and what measure of dynamic stability and does it pass the recommended stability criteria for your design and area of operation.

    The "playing about" bit, is the design!
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.