Boat Design Forums  |  Boat Design Directory  |  Boat Design Gallery  |  Boat Design Book Store  |  Thanks to Our Site Sponsors

Go Back   Boat Design Forums > Design > Sailboats
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Most Recent Posts Gallery Images Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #226  
Old 08-05-2011, 01:30 PM
Doug Lord's Avatar
Doug Lord Doug Lord is offline
Flight Ready
 
Join Date: May 2009
Rep: 1238 Posts: 9,846
Location: Cocoa Beach, Florida
Perils of Edgy Weather in Any Boat

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guillermo View Post
Nice work Doug,

As told:
- To approximate equal submerged volumes when righted/heeled is not an easy task with such shapes.
- Vertical position CoG of hull plus masts, rigging, etc, may not be accurate.
- Only a detailed and careful calculation will produce accurate stab curves (and thus LPS)

One question:
I think I see openings in the sides of the cockpit. Are those watertight?
================
Thanks, Guillermo-and thanks again for the help. About the openings-I'm not sure those are openings-maybe "Stumble" who has actually sailed the boat could fill us in. I'll PM him.
Before I'm thru I'm going to get absolutely accurate info on this boat-I hope!


UPDATE: he didn't know-maybe someone else will....
__________________
yes, it is a Revolution
---"The Foils are the Future.." Jimmy Spithill, 9/5/13
My Gallery: http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/sh...0&ppuser=31218
Reply With Quote


  #227  
Old 08-05-2011, 01:48 PM
peter radclyffe's Avatar
peter radclyffe peter radclyffe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rep: 662 Posts: 1,361
Location: europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Lord View Post
I did the rough sketch below to get some idea of the stability, if any, of the K35 when knocked over past 90 degrees. I ran this by two naval architects, one said the reasoning was good but that the result probably wasn't precise enough; the other said that the sketch leaves something to be desired because the only way to get an accurate LPS/AVS is by using a computer program suited for it.
That being said the sketch shows the boat at an angle of heel of 130 degrees at a displacement of 3250 pounds with 1500 lbs. of ballast which is the most accurate info I've found. It is done to a scale of 3/8"=1'.
As shown the boat appears to have significant positive stability, however, the crew is presumed to be in the water.
Scenario 1: if the crew(est. @ 8 X 170= 1360lb) was standing or sitting at the juncture of the wing and the side of the boat at this angle there would be
no positive stability unless the mast was sealed. Just for the hell of it I looked at the effect of 1 cubic ft. of masthead buoyancy and it is fairly dramatic-at this angle it is about 2000 ft.lbs.
--
Scenario 2: if the crew were standing at the turn of the bilge the boat would appear to still have positive stability in the sketch as shown.

--------------------
Tentative conclusions:
1) I'd sure like to see the designers LPS/AVS because I think this boat has more RM from 90 degrees than it is credited with,
2) The crew can have a lot of effect on this boat when sailing, as we know, or when capsizing and what they do or don't do could be aided by the original designers LPS calculation. This could result in anything from saved lives, to no capsize and ties in with the idea of a practiced crew plan for a capsize in a boat like this.
3) It doesn't appear to me that the crew could right this boat from a turtled position even if they stood as far outboard as possible on the wing on one side. However, if one wing was partially flooded there is a good chance of righting. I believe that a righting system could be devised for this boat.
4) There is enough of the boat likely to be out of the water to amplify the effect of waves tremendously as Mr. Johns has said. I'd say ,based on what people who have sailed the boat have said, that it is possible the immersed wing(acting like a keel) was an asset and not a liability in this case since it may have prevented the boat from getting away from the crew that were in the water. The design of the boat- allowing it to float when turtled- certainly appears to have contributed to saving the majority of the crew-giving them a ready made raft.
=====
Thanks to my friends for their help in understanding this and in understanding and calculating the ORR Stability Index which I am learning to do now.


Notes on the sketch: the estimated CB of the boat is shown at 130 degrees.
The righting moment is calculated by the distance of a vertical line thru the CG of the ballast bulb from the estimated heeled CB. The heeling moment at this angle is calculated by the distance of a vertical line thru the CG of the boat(not incl the keel) from the estimated heeled CB of the boat.

quote

click on image--
I'd say ,based on what people who have sailed the boat have said, that it is possible the immersed wing(acting like a keel) was an asset and not a liability in this case since it may have prevented the boat from getting away from the crew that were in the water. The design of the boat- allowing it to float when turtled- certainly appears to have contributed to saving the majority of the crew-giving them a ready made raft.


your reasoning is illogical, if it did not have wings, it might not have overturned
__________________
The First J Class Designs for 75 years
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 08-05-2011, 02:04 PM
Doug Lord's Avatar
Doug Lord Doug Lord is offline
Flight Ready
 
Join Date: May 2009
Rep: 1238 Posts: 9,846
Location: Cocoa Beach, Florida
Perils of Edgy Weather in Any Boat

Quote:
Originally Posted by peter radclyffe View Post
I'd say ,based on what people who have sailed the boat have said, that it is possible the immersed wing(acting like a keel) was an asset and not a liability in this case since it may have prevented the boat from getting away from the crew that were in the water. The design of the boat- allowing it to float when turtled- certainly appears to have contributed to saving the majority of the crew-giving them a ready made raft.


your reasoning is illogical, if it did not have wings, it might not have overturned
====================================
I'm not trying to be smartass but if it hadn't been built it wouldn't have capsized either. The wings are an integral part of the design without which this particular boat could not sail in anything over very light air. If the design was changed so that wings were not required for their added power to carry sail you'd have a different boat. I'm sure that now -27 years after this boat was designed- the type could be improved, still be "edgy" and still fit within reasonable rules including those mandated by ORR. By looking at the rules for different types of ocean racing boats including, Minis, Open 60's and multihulls
I'm sure safety can be drastically improved for the Kiwi 35 and for the type: high performance racing monohulls.
It will be interesting to see what the sherriffs and the US Sailing investigations come up with.
__________________
yes, it is a Revolution
---"The Foils are the Future.." Jimmy Spithill, 9/5/13
My Gallery: http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/sh...0&ppuser=31218
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 08-05-2011, 02:20 PM
peter radclyffe's Avatar
peter radclyffe peter radclyffe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rep: 662 Posts: 1,361
Location: europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Lord View Post
====================================
I'm not trying to be smartass but if it hadn't been built it wouldn't have capsized either. The wings are an integral part of the design without which this particular boat could not sail in anything over very light air. If the design was changed so that wings were not required for their added power to carry sail you'd have a different boat. I'm sure that now -27 years after this boat was designed- the type could be improved, still be "edgy" and still fit within reasonable rules including those mandated by ORR. By looking at the rules for different types of ocean racing boats including, Minis, Open 60's and multihulls
I'm sure safety can be drastically improved for the Kiwi 35 and for the type: high performance racing monohulls.
It will be interesting to see what the sherriffs and the US Sailing investigations come up with.
quote
I'm not trying to be smartass but if it hadn't been built it wouldn't have capsized either.


even that wing knew when to stop digging a hole
__________________
The First J Class Designs for 75 years
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 08-05-2011, 08:56 PM
Ad Hoc Ad Hoc is offline
Naval Architect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Rep: 2310 Posts: 4,346
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJohns View Post
I had expected the LPS to be higher (>110) and even then I'd argue that it's still a very poor design for an offshore boat given the extended side decks.
Got bored of doing FEA all day yesterday, so i thought for amusement i would have a little "play" with my hydro porgram.

The below images are very very rough, no claim to be exact nor accurate. But from the principal dim's given on several websites a few figures can be reversed engineered to get a "feel". The hull is shown, just so you can the crude model i did. I was very generous with everything being over pessimistic as such....so perhaps a "best" case.??

The perils of edgy design offshore-gz-curve.jpg The perils of edgy design offshore-hull.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 08-05-2011, 09:03 PM
MikeJohns MikeJohns is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Rep: 1983 Posts: 2,952
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Lord View Post
........I'd say ,based on what people who have sailed the boat have said, that it is possible the immersed wing(acting like a keel) was an asset and not a liability in this case since it may have prevented the boat from getting away from the crew that were in the water. The design of the boat- allowing it to float when turtled- certainly appears to have contributed to saving the majority of the crew-giving them a ready made raft..............
Doug you are really going off on a tangent with some of the things you post. People who have sailed the boat don't know anything about its response to an overturning wave, any more than being an airline passenger helps you understand stall aerodynamics.

The effect of the sudden overturning moment increase from deck edge immersion in a beam on capsize is well described and understood. changing the camber of the topsides to reduce the deck edge drag has a significant effect on the tripping action. This is simple well understood hard fact. So absorb it.

In this case the deck edge is enhanced, has no hull below it to provide reserve buoyancy and imparts a very high rotational drag. You could get a little more drag out of the wing by cupping it upwards but it does fine given it's existing shape.

The point where the vulnerability starts is at the dipping of the deck edge which on a design like this is very early in the time frame. The water 'climbs' up over the immersed edge and immediately starts producing significant drag as vorticity in the water behind the sideways translating craft. Add to this the wind induced heel. Any small increase in buoyancy from the immersed wing is immaterial at his point since dynamic forces will dominate the tiny contribution by orders of magnitude.

It's important to understand that a boat translates (Sway) sideways along with the breaking wave. As I said before the amount of immersed deck edge is a direct and important contributor to the overturning moment in any design but if you stick a huge impeller paddle on the deck edge it's contribution goes off the scale.

If the wave is high enough on the upper side or breaks and the jet hits the upper extended deck edge there is an even higher and more violent rollover moment. I don't think this case required that but it should be considered that this alone renders winged boats dangerous. The boat we are considering is also abysmal in it's stability, and all factors compound .

There is no spin you can put on this to suggest that the wings are an asset in a survival situation. They only compromise the vessel , by making the inversion more violent and considerably more inevitable.


If you want an exercise draw the traveling sequence of a 6 foot wave (short steep sea) and superimpose your cross section of the boat on that wavefront look at the heel angle the wing dips at, that's the start of the augmented capsize moment and the mechanism that starts to resists the boat sliding harmlessly, buoying up and allowing the wave to pass harmlessly.

While you sketch the cross section look at how the CB moves relative to the projected position of the wave front on the cross section of the hull.

You need to stop wildly guessing and start to apply some sensible analysis if you really want to understand this event.
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 08-05-2011, 09:09 PM
Ad Hoc Ad Hoc is offline
Naval Architect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Rep: 2310 Posts: 4,346
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJohns View Post
If you want an exercise draw the traveling sequence of a 6 foot wave (short steep sea) and superimpose your cross section of the boat on that wavefront look at the heel angle the wing dips at, ......
And then, not forgetting once this wing is in and submerged, that force required to bring this wing out of the water is the ratio of the density of air to SW at 800 times, then the ratio of the area of the wing to the sail area available...in otherwords, you need 800 times the amount of sail if the areas were the same. Even if the wing area was 1/10th the sail area, you're still talking about a force 80 times required...i aint gonna happen!
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 08-06-2011, 01:58 AM
Gary Baigent Gary Baigent is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Rep: 475 Posts: 2,233
Location: auckland nz
Ad Hoc, I realize that you say your drawing is a rough indication of the K35 ... but you should look again at the rear view photograph of the boat posted on 224: the starboard wing, look closely, has considerably more buoyancy in the area where the flared hull and wings combine - they are not flat wings as you have indicated. I'm sure you will say that is irrelevant, a wing is a wing, but with that buoyancy, the boat at 100 degrees or so, is not going to lie as deep in the water as you have perhaps envisaged.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 08-06-2011, 02:51 AM
Guillermo's Avatar
Guillermo Guillermo is offline
Ingeniero Naval
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rep: 2230 Posts: 3,606
Location: Pontevedra, Spain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ad Hoc View Post
Got bored of doing FEA all day yesterday, so i thought for amusement i would have a little "play" with my hydro porgram.

The below images are very very rough, no claim to be exact nor accurate. But from the principal dim's given on several websites a few figures can be reversed engineered to get a "feel". The hull is shown, just so you can the crude model i did. I was very generous with everything being over pessimistic as such....so perhaps a "best" case.??

Attachment 59490 Attachment 59489
How did you estimate the position of the center of gravity of the hull? Did you include mast, etc?
__________________
Guillermo Gefaell
Gestenaval S.L., Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 08-06-2011, 04:08 AM
Ad Hoc Ad Hoc is offline
Naval Architect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Rep: 2310 Posts: 4,346
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Baigent View Post
... look closely, has considerably more buoyancy in the area where the flared hull and wings combine...
Indeed...but the wings are also not part of the hull, so they are fixed onto the hull, which requires fastenings of some kind and takes up "space" and adds more weight than the wing in the location has buoyancy!. So..swings and round abouts. But if one wishes to be pedantic, all it shall do is increase the peak (GZ) post wing immersion..but wont alter the range...since the deck line remains as it is. You're only adding a small amount of buoyancy in the 40-80 degree range, that is all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guillermo View Post
How did you estimate the position of the center of gravity of the hull? Did you include mast, etc?
Looking at this link:
http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=1014

The displacment is 1293kg...so the hull only is 794kg. Thus without the 499kg bulb(keel) where would the VCG be?...so the hull has a VCG somehwre in the centre of the hull but a tad lower, owing to heavier skins on bottom and also the sole being low. So this would suggested around 1/3rd of hull depth. Then you have the rudder below...and then the mast and sails above..and sails on the deck bringing the VCG back up again...so very roughly..the VCG could be assumed to be around the deckline.

From this, add the 499kg bulb, at some 2.0m below the hull. The hull bottom being 0.0m

That is a pure guess based upon what limited data is shown, as I noted above. Feel free to provide a more "accurate" VCG ...
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 08-06-2011, 04:20 AM
Guillermo's Avatar
Guillermo Guillermo is offline
Ingeniero Naval
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rep: 2230 Posts: 3,606
Location: Pontevedra, Spain
No bulb hull+rig VCG around the deckline seems good enough to me, thanks.
Now, taking into account your hull+bulb GZ curve, LPS (+/- 130 deg, in the line of Doug's rough estimative) is well over the +/- 95 deg roughly deduced from the ORR's 100 SI figure
__________________
Guillermo Gefaell
Gestenaval S.L., Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 08-06-2011, 04:23 AM
Ad Hoc Ad Hoc is offline
Naval Architect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Rep: 2310 Posts: 4,346
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guillermo View Post
No bulb hull+rig VCG around the deckline seems good enough to me, thanks.
Now, taking into account your hull+bulb GZ curve, LPS is well over the +/- 95 deg roughly deduced from the ORR's 100 SI
Exactly. A rough guesstimate is easy...not an absolute...but a rough idea. So either i have made a massive error and incorrect assumption..or, the data being thrown about (which is very hard to verify anywhere), is not what it claims to be.

Since once the keel is added...the GZ is as you say...confusing!!
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 08-06-2011, 08:47 AM
Doug Lord's Avatar
Doug Lord Doug Lord is offline
Flight Ready
 
Join Date: May 2009
Rep: 1238 Posts: 9,846
Location: Cocoa Beach, Florida
The Perils of Edgy Weather in Any Boat

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ad Hoc View Post
Looking at this link:
http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=1014

The displacment is 1293kg...so the hull only is 794kg. Thus without the 499kg bulb(keel) where would the VCG be?...so the hull has a VCG somehwre in the centre of the hull but a tad lower, owing to heavier skins on bottom and also the sole being low. So this would suggested around 1/3rd of hull depth. Then you have the rudder below...and then the mast and sails above..and sails on the deck bringing the VCG back up again...so very roughly..the VCG could be assumed to be around the deckline.

From this, add the 499kg bulb, at some 2.0m below the hull. The hull bottom being 0.0m

That is a pure guess based upon what limited data is shown, as I noted above. Feel free to provide a more "accurate" VCG ...

=============
Ad Hoc, that is the same link that I used in post number 2-and it is incorrect according to the brother of the owner and Meade Gougeon(see post 143 below):
the ballast bulb was increased to 1500lb(681.8kg) raising the all up weight minus crew to 3250lb(1477.3kg). Making the hull 1750lb(795.5kg).
I haven't found any indication whether the carbon mast was sealed or not-could make a big difference as the mast is immersed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Lord View Post
From Alan "Mr. Clean" Block on SA yesterday: (Note: Block is management at Sailing Anarchy and was actually at the memorial service)

" I learned today, from Meade Gougeon (during his speech at the memorial ceremony) that the Gougeons and Morleys increased the keel's weight from 1200(1100dl)# to over 1500#. Combined wth switching the rig from alloy to carbon, the increase in stability was substantial. Morley* told me that the gust that knocked them down and held them down was peculiar in both its strength and more importantly, its duration. That being said, it was a mellow knockdown, and he has no idea what caused the head injuries that most likely killed his brother and Mark's girlfriend, but it was most definitely not some kind of ultra-quick violent knockdown."

*brother of the skipper and part of the crew of Wingnuts during the incident

Block quote from here: http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/ind...&#entry3349498 post 27
Pictures-K35 hauled; with port wing folded......
click on image
Attached Thumbnails
The perils of edgy design offshore-kiwi-35-hauled.jpg  The perils of edgy design offshore-kiwi-35-hauled-2.jpg  The perils of edgy design offshore-kiwi-35-hauled-3.jpg  

The perils of edgy design offshore-kiwi35-stern-view.jpg  The perils of edgy design offshore-kiwi-35-one-wing-folded-up.jpg  
__________________
yes, it is a Revolution
---"The Foils are the Future.." Jimmy Spithill, 9/5/13
My Gallery: http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/sh...0&ppuser=31218
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 08-06-2011, 09:00 AM
Ad Hoc Ad Hoc is offline
Naval Architect
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Rep: 2310 Posts: 4,346
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Lord View Post
=============
Ad Hoc, that is the same link that I used in post number 2-and it is incorrect according to the brother of the owner and Meade Gougeon...
All just hearsay

Documented independent facts are required...otherwise it is my dog is bigger than yours!!

As I said, the curves are indicative...and in no way am I saying it is accurate. Only those clutching at staws are suggesting otherwise....
Reply With Quote


  #240  
Old 08-06-2011, 01:22 PM
Guillermo's Avatar
Guillermo Guillermo is offline
Ingeniero Naval
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rep: 2230 Posts: 3,606
Location: Pontevedra, Spain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Lord View Post
............
Pictures-K35 hauled; with port wing folded......
Is that hinged union and the wing fixing mechanism strong enough as to withstand a full inversion without folding? In other words: can at all the volume of the wings be considered intact and in place for stab calculations?
__________________
Guillermo Gefaell
Gestenaval S.L., Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How many forum members does it take to design an offshore trailable multihull? Richard Woods Multihulls 34 09-20-2013 08:34 AM
small offshore yacht design wmonastra Sailboats 42 01-16-2009 04:13 AM
Offshore ability of sharpie design? Seafarer24 Sailboats 19 04-07-2008 01:47 AM
Personal Offshore Catamaran Design JCD Multihulls 45 07-12-2006 08:48 PM
The Perils of Fast Foilers Chris Ostlind Sailboats 5 04-13-2006 11:41 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:51 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Web Site Design and Content Copyright ©1999 - 2014 Boat Design Net