procedure for an inclining experiment in air

I have been on the 12217 committee since the early 1990's. From experience I can say that international committees work very very slowly. Fortunately our convenor is not only a very good NA but also a skilled negotiator and always (eventually) manages to get everyone to agree.

Creating the ISO standards was a mammoth job, not helped by non-boating politicians who insisted on changes. And as it was the first truly comprehensive standard we knew some boats would "fall through the cracks" - like the Cambridge river punt for example.

The long delay between standards is understandable. It took a few years for people to get used to working with the standard and then to offer their comments. It then took several years to rewrite the relevant changes. Finally (the stage it's at now) it has taken three years for the editors to dot t's and cross i's

Richard Woods of Woods Designs

www.sailingcatamarans.com

 

Having participated in guidance in developing new regs (Canada) I can only imagine what the ISO is like. Those who have not participated may not appreciate the time, work, and dedication involved.
In our case there was often the frustration of dealing with people who were not familiar with small vessels (under 24m) or came up with some real 'zinger' ideas. One of the most memorable proposals was the requirement that boat ceilings (hull linings) be perforated ( 12mm holes on a 300mm grid) so that if there was ever a fire behind the ceiling, smoke could be detected. When it was explained that these holes would also provide air to the fire and accelerate the situation the idea was dropped. Time wasted!

 

We've been using perforated ceilings for years. Great at sound absorption. Dampa make an excellent range:
http://www.dampa.com/marine/products/Tiles/Tiles/colours-surfaces.html

This is the problem with large committee's. Areas of expertise by one individual is often overlooked, or dismissed by the larger number of 'others', as folly, simply because it is outside their area of expertise. I would suggest the ignorance is on the other foot.

 

Like everyone else, I've had to buy the rules and hoped that at least inform me of the changes that were occurring. This has not happened, even though I sent all my data. But what is worse, in the Spanish version of the standard, there was some mistake and, to my knowledge, the creators / translators thereof have not had time to warn users. Frankly, knowing good and appreciating the immense work that involves creating rules, I think at one point they considered finished some jobs that were not.
The Dampa ceiling is great and helps slow the spread of fire. Its holes, as far as I know, prevent reflected sound in the metal slats. In rooms with low ceilings reverberation occurs, and can be disturbing. Holes not used for anything else.

 

Hi everybody, Just a follow up, I found this from principles of naval architecture volume 1, which clears everything up and has a nice concise method for the inclining experiment in air. find attached if you are interested. thanks for all the help on this issue! View attachment extract from principles of naval architecture.pdf

 

SNAME and ASTM are currently working on guidelines and a formal standard for air inclines.

Not ready for prime time yet, but hopefully soon.

 

Remark: the linked document contains a faulty formula. On page 127 in the 1st sentence is written
x = A + B W1 (W1 + W2)
correct is x = A + B W1 / (W1 + W2)

 

Note that SNAME has just published T&R Bulletin 9-1, as a guideline for air inclines. See the post "Back against the wall".