effective plating

Hi all,

What is a reasonable width for the effective plating for aluminium?
ISO (validation version, not yet valid?) says 60*platethk.
Any experience with ABS, DNV et all?

Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Ed

 

if you search these pages(search button) top toolbar) you will find many such posts
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=20066

 

Sorry, maybe the term is not self-explanatory.

The effective platting (according to ISO) is a band of plating that represent the lower flange of stiffening members working in bending ("I" lower flange to be used in section modulus calculation).

I've tried googling everywhere, but no avail, is there another term for this?

Thanks,
Ed

 

ABS High-Speed specifies that primary deep structural members in steel and aluminum have an effective plating width of the lesser of 0.5*sum of spacing on each side of the member, 0.33*l or 750mm. For secondary structural members, effective plating width is the lesser of 0.5*sum of spacing on each side of the member or 60*t for aluminum (80*t for steel).

ABS Offshore Racing Yachts specifies that effective plating width for both steel and aluminum is the lesser of s or 100*t.
Roger

 

Iso 12215

http://www.ibinews.com/ibinews/ebb/tech_10.html

The article explains the ISO 12215 etc., but for more data you may have to pay.

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=25271

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=25270

Pericles

 

Thanks all for answers,

RogerB, that is what I am after, so 60*t is reasonable after all ...

 

shouldn't one use the effective plate width for the rules one uses. For example when using ABS, you get a certain W for a particular floor. I think that W is based upon the effective plating width of 100*t, when you would use 60*t you would get a much lower W and therefor you would design a heavier floor.

In the above example there would be no problem as it is designed heavier as required (except for some weightgain), but in another case and you would use GL rules with the 100*t you might get a too light construction.

Any comments on the above?