Boat Design Forums  |  Boat Design Directory  |  Boat Design Gallery  |  Boat Design Book Store  |  Thanks to Our Site Sponsors
  #16  
Old 04-20-2017, 02:39 AM
bhnautika bhnautika is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rep: 571 Posts: 751
Location: australia
Q1 all three
Q2 Yes I am making some assumptions but light displacement boats tend to have flattish bottoms coupled with the flared sides would generally mean the CB would move out significantly making them stiff but you can get considerable rolling accelerations.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-20-2017, 01:16 PM
mcm mcm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Rep: 26 Posts: 158
Location: Port Townsend, Wa., USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhnautica
light displacement boats tend to have flattish bottoms coupled with the flared sides would generally mean the CB would move out significantly making them stiff
@25deg angle of heel the designer calculated that the transverse shift of the center of buoyancy will only be 0.79'(0.24m). Hull bottom is 2'(0.61m) bellow the waterline creating a 21deg. dead rise angle to the waterline.

Still, my main concern is whether that much (flare) in the top-side will kill the boats momentum as it heaves in a seaway.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Efficiency View Post
name the boat supply some pix/lines
The designer is still making adjustments to the lines of the boat which is not yet named, and I don't have permission to reproduce the designer's work. As a consumer I am looking for second opinions before I spend too much money.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-20-2017, 06:56 PM
bhnautika bhnautika is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rep: 571 Posts: 751
Location: australia
It seems my assumptions about the mid section shape are wrong as more information comes to hand (21 degree dead rise). So is this close to the shape.
I may be slow coming back.
Attached Thumbnails
Is this too much flam??-section.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-20-2017, 07:46 PM
Mr Efficiency Mr Efficiency is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Rep: 702 Posts: 5,443
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcm View Post
The designer is still making adjustments to the lines of the boat which is not yet named, and I don't have permission to reproduce the designer's work. As a consumer I am looking for second opinions before I spend too much money.
So it is a new design with no examples in use ? Is there some reason to fixate on this boat in preference to existing, proven designs ?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-20-2017, 09:08 PM
mcm mcm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Rep: 26 Posts: 158
Location: Port Townsend, Wa., USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhnautika View Post
So is this close to the shape.
Thank's bhnautika, that's close, but I made a mistake.
The dead rise angle from the bottom of the center-line to the waterline is 31deg. not 21deg.
21Deg. is the dead rise angle from the bottom to 1' (0.3048m) bellow the waterline.
And at 1' (0.3048m) below the waterline the the mid-ship beam is 5.13' (1.56m) overall or 2.57' (0.78m) from the center-line, while your mid-ship beam at 1' (0.3048m) below the waterline looks to be 4.55' (1.39m) overall, or 2.28' (0.69m) from the center-line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Efficiency
So it is a new design with no examples in use ? Is there some reason to fixate on this boat in preference to existing, proven designs ?
Yes, it's a new design, and my fixation is to be more involved in the process.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-22-2017, 05:04 AM
Mr Efficiency Mr Efficiency is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Rep: 702 Posts: 5,443
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcm View Post
Yes, it's a new design, and my fixation is to be more involved in the process.
Maybe best to wait and see, rather than be the guinea pig.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-24-2017, 12:42 AM
bhnautika bhnautika is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rep: 571 Posts: 751
Location: australia
Mcm how about this shape. Heave can be influenced by more than just mid section shape , L/B ratio, L/disp, radius of gyration and wave spectrum. Then there is heave and stabilty. Top side flair may add resistance to heeled waterlines if they are to asymmetric, if you have concerns talk it over with the designer.
Attached Thumbnails
Is this too much flam??-section2.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-24-2017, 03:12 AM
nzboy nzboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Rep: 36 Posts: 143
Location: nz
My take on this design is its very similar to racing designs of late 70s and 80s
before canting keels and all the volvo stuff. You actually need a wide shear beam .As the boat heels the waterline beam increases and increases stability but draught decreases hence less resistance in theory
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-25-2017, 01:00 PM
mcm mcm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Rep: 26 Posts: 158
Location: Port Townsend, Wa., USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by nzboy View Post
. You actually need a wide shear beam .As the boat heels the waterline beam increases and increases stability but draught decreases hence less resistance in theory
So what you're saying is that; in your opinion, a wide shear beam won't stop the boat's momentum as it heaves, but rather, it's stability will increase as it heels and it's momentum might even increase with less resistance due to decreasing draft.

I am not so sure. It's a double ended design so the lines won't change that much as it heels. The draft may decrease some, but the sectional drawings at 25deg heels doesn't show much if any decrease in wetted surface area at that angle of heel.

I have the designer's opinion, but I want other opinions as to whether a narrower beam can create a more sea-kindly, motion comfort despite the light displacement.
I want to avoid the structural exposure of a wide stern to breaking stern seas, as well as the pounding across wave crests of a wide dish speed-sled.
And yet, hopefully with this light displacement, not get left too far behind.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-26-2017, 02:32 AM
bhnautika bhnautika is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rep: 571 Posts: 751
Location: australia
mcm as the hull is a double ender I am guessing its water plane area will be less so heave will less for its displacement. B/T (wl beam/draft) of 3.2 is ok for up wind also.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-26-2017, 04:47 AM
nzboy nzboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Rep: 36 Posts: 143
Location: nz
Its fairly hard to comment on a design without seeing This link maybe of help
http://sailingtrivia.ravenyachts.fr/...esigns-by.html
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-26-2017, 04:54 AM
nzboy nzboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Rep: 36 Posts: 143
Location: nz
Is this too much flam??-francois_chevalier-vor2001-vor2012.jpg These diagram shows evolution of designs
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-26-2017, 05:00 AM
nzboy nzboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Rep: 36 Posts: 143
Location: nz
chevalier - taglang, lines, maxi racing, naval architecture, sailing, volvo ocean race, yacht design, yacht lines, yachting If you copy these tags into google you
will come up with the page in question as the address I posted wasnt specific enough
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-27-2017, 02:20 AM
CT249 CT249 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Rep: 215 Posts: 841
Location: Sydney Australia
If the shape is like BHNautica's last sketch then it's similar to many existing boats that work well; the J/35, Davidson 42 are just two products of well respected designers that spring to mind.

I've never been in a light boat that had its stern exposed to significant breaking wave impact. Maybe I've just been lucky but they tend to move quickly and don't create much of a fuss in the water that could "trip" a following sea.
Reply With Quote


  #30  
Old 04-27-2017, 02:22 AM
CT249 CT249 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Rep: 215 Posts: 841
Location: Sydney Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by nzboy View Post
Attachment 113015 These diagram shows evolution of designs
Well, evolution of a sort. Arguably it's only positive evolution if your desire is for a monohull that is ever more complex and ever more expensive for its size and performance.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


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.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Web Site Design and Content Copyright ©1999 - 2017 Boat Design Net