Origami steel yacht construction

Originally Posted by Wynand N

I had a look at the links Mike supplied and noticed something interesting and therefor I have to ask this;

Not to be fussy Wynand, but who provided the links?

aha....

I think this "Origami" nonsense should end slowly. There is no such "method".

we are talking the "frames first" or "plates first" methods here. Every other description is just a misnomer and should be avoided.

On the rest you definetivley can comment much, much better than I can.

Regards
Richard

[welder/fitter]

Wynand,
Yeah, I was going to point out that Richard gave the links, I just copied them from his post. Whoever came up with this "origami" name, I believe was refering to the way that the hull-sides are formed (attach come-alongs & bend).

Peter,
I suppose it depends on how tight one's budget is. from the few pictures I've seen, a jig doesn't seem to need more than some angle iron & a bit of I-beam for the legs. Looks as though one could assemble one in a long day, two at most. The first non-family, steel-related job I had was fitting truss sections in jigs at Mainland Manufacturing, when I was 19/20. It took me most of two shifts to build the jigs(2) & they were good for 10km worth of conveyor truss sections. Built right, the frame could be later used as a cradle for transporting the boat, with obvious modifications for blasting & painting, and subsequent padding of supports, etc. . As you can appreciate, a couple of days work is "a drop in the bucket" when amateur one-off boatbuilding & for professional/multiple-boat builders, it would be a real bonus in the long run, though would probably be larger in the latter case, to allow for different lengths, beams & masses.

This gives me an idea for another thread...

Mike

[Wynand N]

Peter, the Stadt jig was constructed from 100x50mm channel iron and 50x50x6mm angle iron. It weight in the region of about 400kg. Take note that it was built solid for continuous use and the "uprights" much to high and a lot of mass wasted. Building took just over a day - actually the longest bit of building it is the layout (Loft) of the three transverse frame sets.
It can be made cheaper and lighter for a one off.

Sorry Richard missed your links...
But you are quite right - building should be regarded as plates or frames first. "Origami" is plainly a frameless construction, but in BS case limited in narrow boxy structures to reduce welding and I can still not make peace with that unsightly hard chine formed amidships.....
Complete welding of a 34 v/d Stadt - hull and deck, rudder and keel, inclusive of tanks, floors frames etc took about 3 days flat with a MIG welder.

[pdwiley]

Originally Posted by Wynand N

Peter, the Stadt jig was constructed from 100x50mm channel iron and 50x50x6mm angle iron. It weight in the region of about 400kg. Take note that it was built solid for continuous use and the "uprights" much to high and a lot of mass wasted. Building took just over a day - actually the longest bit of building it is the layout (Loft) of the three transverse frame sets.
It can be made cheaper and lighter for a one off.

OK, thanks, that's what I wanted to know. I don't think the time/materials involved is significant in the overall life of the project, either.

The first 2 things I built when I got started on my boat was the gantry and the grid base. I have many, many ongoing uses for the gantry and the grid base is essentially the transport platform later on. I can jack it up, put pipe rollers under it and drag it straight out the big doors.

PDW

[Brent Swain]

Originally Posted by Wynand N

Peter, the Stadt jig was constructed from 100x50mm channel iron and 50x50x6mm angle iron. It weight in the region of about 400kg. Take note that it was built solid for continuous use and the "uprights" much to high and a lot of mass wasted. Building took just over a day - actually the longest bit of building it is the layout (Loft) of the three transverse frame sets.
It can be made cheaper and lighter for a one off.

Sorry Richard missed your links...
But you are quite right - building should be regarded as plates or frames first. "Origami" is plainly a frameless construction, but in BS case limited in narrow boxy structures to reduce welding and I can still not make peace with that unsightly hard chine formed amidships.....
Complete welding of a 34 v/d Stadt - hull and deck, rudder and keel, inclusive of tanks, floors frames etc took about 3 days flat with a MIG welder.

If hard chines amidships, below the waterline only, and thus out of sight, with fully rounded conic ends, is ugly, then the way to make them attractive is to run more of them, the full length of the hull, above the waterline, in full view?
That sounds a lot uglier to me.
If you build a Van de Stadt without the frames, and match the plates up the same way, it is geometrically impossible to get anything but the same shape.
The frame is worthwhile only of you are building more than one. For the one of it is not worth the time and expense..

[Brent Swain]

Originally Posted by apex1

Not to be fussy Wynand, but who provided the links?

aha....

I think this "Origami" nonsense should end slowly. There is no such "method".

we are talking the "frames first" or "plates first" methods here. Every other description is just a misnomer and should be avoided.

On the rest you definetivley can comment much, much better than I can.

Regards
Richard

Origami means reaching the shape by joining the edges, without depending on the use of frames. I have used this " non existent" method for the building of dozens of boats with my own hands. Does that make me a magician?
Great to hear plate first is expanding, toward the day when origami becomes the standard method of building small sailing hulls, as a logical conclusion.

[Brent Swain]

Originally Posted by apex1

Just to get that straight again.

BS has not developed or invented the so called Origami Method, he has copied it! Others have done that long before he entered the scene. And they have done it the right way round and engineered their designs properly and to proven rules and scantlings.

Nobody needs BS to build a "plates first" boat.

Here are some links to alternatives.

http://www.yago-project.com

a proven one

http://www.al-yachtdesign.de/baufotos.htm

another proven

http://www.submarineboat.com/pauls_boat.htm

I don´t know this one.

Regards
Richard

Gerd only began building his Yago after buying my book, which he will confirm, as his postings on the origami site confirm..
Expect many more designers to switch to origami, as the huge advantages are realized. It is quickly becoming the standard method of building small steel sailing craft, outdating other methods.
As I have stated many times on this and other sites , I have never claimed to have invented origami boat building. The method has been in use for as long as sheet metal has been in use.
You have to lie, and put words in my mouth, to try discredit me.
Grahame Shanon has also started designing in origami.

[Brent Swain]

Originally Posted by pdwiley

OK, thanks, that's what I wanted to know. I don't think the time/materials involved is significant in the overall life of the project, either.

The first 2 things I built when I got started on my boat was the gantry and the grid base. I have many, many ongoing uses for the gantry and the grid base is essentially the transport platform later on. I can jack it up, put pipe rollers under it and drag it straight out the big doors.

PDW

i have worked with a gantry and overhead cranes at times. While it may be worthwhile for a larger boat. I haven't found them worth the time for one off 36 footer. I can build the hull without one in a fraction the time it takes to build a gantry..

Originally Posted by Brent Swain

You have to lie, and put words in my mouth, to try discredit me.
Grahame Shanon has also started designing in origami.

Where did I lie?

And why should I like to discredit you? YOU are far better on that than any other.

Originally Posted by Brent Swain

Who said anything different?

Dreams

just dreams

[dskira]

Brent, I read again the thread, and yes you make assumption about my integrity, you mention than I over charge my client. all that is not nice, but back to reality:
Could you answer my question, very simple question:
What is the GM of your yacht, with all the calculation that goes with it.
And stop mentioning your cruise. its boring.
I have the right to challenge you.
You obviously didn't answer since you even do not know what is GM nor BM, so everything you said was a pack of lie.
You make very serious negative and insulting comment about us naval architect and you are not capable to answer a simple question about yacht design.
For 500 post you just blow wind without any knowledge.
I expect from you apologises, and make an admission that everything you said was just a lie.
To make matter very clear, I will never every leave you alone until you acknowledge you shortcoming.
For me your post are irrelevant, since you lie once, you lie all the time.
And i am talking about yacht design, not you personally.
You sell design you don't comprehend, you commit a fraud by doing so.
And you think a little nice post will changes everything? think again.
By the way I quote you:

Great to hear plate first is expanding, toward the day when origami becomes the standard method of building small sailing hulls, as a logical conclusion.

Are you Jane of Arc and you heard voice?

Dishonnest person are not welcome, and I will make sure that every one knows you are a cheater and a con artist by selling something you know nothing about, pretending the contrary.
You even didn't have the courage to stay away, you have to come back with your unprofessional attitude.
GM? BM? Weight estimate? stability curve?
Nothing. You just make up this ridiculous 170 degree, and a G you even didn't calcul but position where it make you happy.
As a professional I challenge you, and I show to everybody how naked you are, nothing left, just a rambling insane talking to himself. But dangerous since some beginner come here and will read your misinformation.
As a yacht designer you are the reason so much regulation are in place. Ignorant and arrogant you make the profession a target for the administration. Thank you for that.
500 lies, 500 insults, 500 rambling. All that to sell, using the forum as a platform to promote your design. Shame on you. You do not belong here.
Don't try your negative back stabing, it will be not well taken, I promess you.
Every thing I said can be proven to the letter.
Daniel

[rugludallur]

If you ask a religious man to prove his religion he will tell you that your methodology is backwards, you need to assume that his religion is true and base your logic on that assumption.
He will also give you unverifiable stories as proof and quote books as if they are proof.

If you ask a scientist to prove his hypothesis he either provides you with a verifiable/reproducible proof or his theory is automatically debunked.

To paraphrase Richard Dawkins:
I can't prove that boats built or designed by BS are unsafe any more than I can prove that there is a teacup in space orbiting the sun. I am not required to prove or disprove either case, it's Brent's responsibility to prove his claim.

At this point I want to ask Brent for proof of his claims, if he does not reply with verifiable proof I can only assume one of two things.

1. BS building methods are based on religous faith & fanaticism
2. BS methods and hypothesis are debunked

(edited to fix spelling)

[M&M Ovenden]

Originally Posted by Brent Swain

If hard chines amidships, below the waterline only, and thus out of sight, with fully rounded conic ends, is ugly, then the way to make them attractive is to run more of them, the full length of the hull, above the waterline, in full view?
That sounds a lot uglier to me.
If you build a Van de Stadt without the frames, and match the plates up the same way, it is geometrically impossible to get anything but the same shape.
The frame is worthwhile only of you are building more than one. For the one of it is not worth the time and expense..

Aesthetics are too subjective to be argued yet we may not all agree on what we find pretty or ugly. For my part I don't mind visible chines. I actually find that some well drawn, naturally flowing chines can look very nice. Chined or fully rounded is not a criteria of aesthetics for me. A boat can be all in curves but boring, just as much as a chined boat can be well balance and attractive to the eye. I am pretty open minded when it comes to boat aesthetics, I like classic boats but can see beauty in a modern racing machine. Sailboats win my heart but I can be attracted by a nice looking motor yacht. My vision of beauty for boats is usually not set on clear criteria, its more vague like flow and balance....but one clear thing that I haven't come to appreciate, and quite bluntly repulses me, is a chine that ends into a knuckle, its anything but natural to my eye. It doesn't matter if it's under the water line, its there. To me, a boat is something close to a piece of art. In a painting every single brush stroke counts...same for a boat, doesn't matter if its under the water. Sorry, I just can't get over it, those partial chines in the middle of Brents origami boat hurt my eye. If they faded out smoothly into the curve it would look fine, that's easily achievable at the bow of a chined hull, but a knuckle in the middle of flowing lines irks me like a pimple in the middle of my face.

Murielle

[MikeJohns]

Murielle
I like chines. In communities where seaworthiness is the prime importance there is little distinction, the vessel is judged on practical aspects.
Facets and edges are actually attractive to the human eyes providing they flow nicely. I agree with you on the aesthetics of Brents chine to round transition. It's a brutal design feature.

[MikeJohns]

Originally Posted by Brent Swain

Origami means reaching the shape by joining the edges, without depending on the use of frames. ..............
Great to hear plate first is expanding, toward the day when origami becomes the standard method of building small sailing hulls, as a logical conclusion.

I think you are about 20 years in the past, we've looked at it, considered it, incorporated it into class rules and moved on. You are still sitting in the forest beating your drum and shouting to the locals "Look I've discovered this method......... "

But you are just a circus side stall now. You've made a fool of yourself on this forum. The ony people you will influence are those ignorant of your methods and your dishonest representation of the advantages.

[pdwiley]

Originally Posted by Brent Swain

i have worked with a gantry and overhead cranes at times. While it may be worthwhile for a larger boat. I haven't found them worth the time for one off 36 footer. I can build the hull without one in a fraction the time it takes to build a gantry..

Given that I built my gantry in a day, I'm confident in saying that you're dreaming. You can't even TACK TOGETHER a 36' hull in a day let alone build one.

I have uses for the gantry long after the boat is finished. Unlike you I not only aspire to own more than a steel boat, I already do so, and I like building things.

PDW