Naval Architecture vs. Yacht Design

Interesting topic. I haven't been around much lately as I have been starting my own yacht design practice. As I am neither a PE or degree'd NA, I am being very careful how I word things in letters, discussions and advertising.

This all came up the other day when I applied for my Occupational Liscense here in Citrus County. The lady at the desk could not imagine that you could design boats and not be liscensed by the state. After a few phone calls she decided I was right and granted the liscense. The last hurdle was deciding what to do with me as they don't have a yacht designers category. The decision was to call me an "architect-vessels only". I hope I never have to go to court with this type of contradictory title on my liscense!

I have also thought that some type of independent certification would be good for designers. As Eric has said earlier though, who will foot the bill? I suggested this to SNAME, but they seem to have little interest in small craft design (other than cashing designers dues checks). I also gave up my membership after around 15 years. Not just because of the PE debacle, but mainly SNAME's seeming lack of interest in small craft design. I wrote the president of SNAME a letter explaining my reasons, but never got a reply. I guess my thoughts on this were justified afterall!

I, and many other designers, have been worried about the unintended consequences of PE liscensing in NA. I just hope there isn't a horrible accident involving a pregnant woman and her 3 children during the middle of an election year. We could all be trying to pass some kind of test (gotta' protect the public from these unscrupulous boat designers!)

By the way, Chris may be surprised that I agree with his definition of a Naval Architect vs. a Yacht Designer. If you don't have a degree in Naval Architecture, you probably should refrain from calling yourself one.

 

SNAME

I am not really sure why people say that SNAME doesn't support small craft. It probably supports small craft as much as it supports ships. Remember, the main thing SNAME does is to provide a forum, primarily for people to write papers, and something like 20%-30% of papers in general from SNAME are on small vessels of one sort or another.

In addition, it is mostly volunteer efforts in general that result in anything, so it depends on the individual efforts of those interested in some area. The CSYS, for example, is a very good effort supporting small craft, and is a lot of work every two years. Panel O-36 efforts in ferries is another example of an active group, but without just one particular individual, it would probably dissappear. However, even given a SNAME forum, people still have to write papers, which means they have to either take personal time or be paid by their employer. Then they have to travel, and they have to have something to write about. In the context of small craft, there is very little research or money available, so it is difficult to pull a paper together on something new.

There is also the long-awaited small craft design manual, but this is another example - no one is being paid for the work on this, and frankly, in small craft, unlike ships, you actually have a chance to make a little bit of money on a book, so the motivation to sit down and write for love of the art is even less compelling.

The people running the committee also have lives too, and this is a typical example of the basic issues in any technical society. Each time the committee on the book changes, it gets going a bit again, some progress is made, then the chair has a baby, gets a life, and it stalls again.

If someone wants SNAME to become active in a given area, just start doing it, don't ask someone else to do it.

 

Sorry to be redundant, but I don't want this point to be lost: There ARE existing organizations specifically involved with small craft. They include:

ABYC (which coordinates US participation in ISO reg development)
The Society of Boat and Yacht Designers
The Society of Small Craft Designers
The ORC and other racing organizations
two major surveyors organizations
three yacht design schools in the U.S. and two in the U.K.
organizations of industrial designers, such as The IDSA
plus
The United States Coast Guard, The British MCA, Boat U.S, The United States Power Squadron, The NMMA, Professional BoatBuilder Magazine, & BoatDesign.net

For this reason I do not necessarily see SNAME as the right organization to do this. I think ABYC should organize seminars around the U.S. to educate people about the ISO, and at the end should offer yacht designers a chance to take a rigorous exam and be awarded a certificate for a score of 80% or better. The exam would cover the material in the seminars and that taught by the 3 U.S. yacht design schools. I'd like to see the other organizations named above work with the ABYC to make this happen.

I agree about just doing it. If someone were to apply a rigorous standard and start issuing credentials it would mean something regardless of what the states do or don't recognise.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chris, Concerning PE's you state:

As far as a P.E. practicing yacht design without expertise in it, P.E.s are specifically forbidden to practice outside of their area of expertise, and held to it much more carefully and in detail than unlicensed individuals. (Since they have something to lose.)

but also:

In 1992, the Coast Guard promulgated NVIC 10-92, which offers “expedited review” to P.E. (or ABS) stamped drawings because they had found that drawings by P.E.s generally had fewer errors and were easier and faster to review .... CA does not recognize NAME as a discipline, but the board member there noted that some aspects of design of ships would fall under the scope of ME regardless .... (There are also a few places Coast Guard explicitly requires P.E. certification – in regards OPA 90 submissions and industrial system analyses that would require certification by a P.E. if on land, again such as B31.1 certification.)

Are PEs in Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, or other areas who stamp drawings of passenger vessels for USCG approval practicing outside their areas, in your opinion? What do you make of the fact that Stevens Institute regards Naval Architecture as part of its Civil Engineering Department?

 

P.E.

The area of expertise is determined by individual circumstance, which a board would review in detail upon receiving a complaint unless there is explicit practice descriptions in a state law.

Note that some states have disciplines, (most) others don't, so some P.E.s are just engineers, but others are restricted by more explicit practice rules. The former can practice in any area that they can demonstrate expertise in, the latter must meet the practice limits of the jurisdiction, whatever they are.

The only two states I know of that have NAME and are discipline states are Oregon and Washington (both have had NAME for a long time - OR since 1922, though they have deal with WA where WA does the NAME test for both and OR did Timber Engineering for both). I assume a person practicing NAME in these states should probably be licensed in NAME, though there are certainly many areas of marine engineering that are more or less mechanical, so design of a shipboard HVAC system, for example, could probably be either. California is a discipline state but doesn't recognize NAME and regards some areas of NAME as practice of ME, though it actually hasn't ever come up as far as anyone remembers. However, this is why I have a WA NAME and both a WA and CA ME.

I can get a general P.E. in most states, (based on either license) but I would be in deep trouble if I was to design a building foundation, even though there is nothing on the stamp that would control it, because I have no documented specialized training or experience in soils, civil engineering and so on. However, CA has explicit requirements for ME, CE, SE, etc. so I don't have a stamp that would pass review at the county office for a building.

(As a matter of fact, if someone has expertise in two areas they cannot sit a second exam, even in a different discipline, in some general states once they have a license. I know of a NA who also has an EE in a general state who practices NA and is highly qualified in, and practices NAME, but can't sit the exam because of this. However, WA or OR would probably want to have him sit the exam for an NAME.)

I also agree that SNAME shouldn't be the small craft licensing group, and further think that such a group should probably be completely independent and do only that (and perhaps awards). Otherwise there is a possible appearance of conflict of interest. (And the other groups have their plates full anyway.)

 

I understand that most of the papers published by SNAME are written without compensation. But if all of these things are being done without pay and due to volunteerism, where did the $135 a year in dues go? I looked back through every issue of Marine Technology that I had received over the years and could find no one article that was of use to me in my daily design work. Most of it was for large vessels and was mostly theoretical. For these things to be useful, they should be summed up with a simple method of applying he data in a normal design process. Without that, the information has little value other than for discussion. By the way, SNAME considers everything up to 200' to be "Small Craft". Maybe to someone used to designing RORO's, but to a yacht designer, 200' is a pretty sizeable vessel. Frankly, I have gotten far more out of my free subscription to Professional Boatbuilder than I received from SNAME.

I did have an interesting phone call today from the lady at the county licensing office. They need me to come back in to have my license modified. It seems her bosses think having "Architect" on there will mean I need to be licensed by the state board of professional regulation. So they are going to give me another title. I suggested "Boat Designer", but they don't have that as a standard category. It may end up "Designer - Boats" or something.

By the way, I am a member of ABYC and SBYD. The SSCD seems to have disapeared as I used to be a member, but they didn't seem to be doing all that much. If anyone would like to start a southern chapter of SBYD, I would do my best to help out. Trouble is, Florida is such a big state that the small number of people would be pretty well spread out from each other. I live 5 hours from Lauderdale, 2.5 hours from St. Augustine, 1.5 hours from Tampa. Maybe we could all meet in Orlando?

 

I have been very pleased to read this discussion of the PE licensing issue - Some very well considered and informed viewpoints on this have been aired, thank you all.

I think you would be hard pressed to say an ME practicing any part of ship or small craft design and engineering is operating outside the discipline. I am a recently graduated ME, and so am most certainly biased, but hear me out. My main motivation for getting the degree was experience in building and repairing yachts and commercial craft and the desire to be involved with their design and engineering. While looking for the right school I carefuly examined the curriculums of the (few) NAME undergraduate degrees as compared to undergraduate ME programs. There is very little difference, mostly it is that in an NAME program the capstone design experiences are centered around nautical applications. The core requirements are essentially the same: three semesters of calculus, three semesters of physics, one semester each of statics and dynamics, courses in mechanics of materials, two semesters of thermodymamics, one of heat transfer, two semesters of fluid dynamics, controls theory plus a selection of courses in applying these skills to solve design engineering problems.

I should think that any person with training in NAME who has passed the EIT exam, and who also has the requisite work experience, would be well prepared for the PE test for mechanical engineering and likewise for an ME taking the ship design PE.

I have to admit to some skepticism about the movement toward a PE for naval architecture - thinking it would squeeze a quite a few very good, but less technically trained designers out of the business. Some of the previous statements in this thread have set me somewhat at ease on this. I have shifted in my perception of this from "it is probably a bad idea.." to "it is basically unecessary...".

On Timm's appraisal of the SNAME papers, I do not think they are so bad. It is true that they are largely written toward large ship subjects, and that they are not always directly applicable to the problems a designer/engineer faces regularly. But, I think their intent is to stretch the knowledge base within the field - they are not intended as design manuals but as communications of (ideally at least) the most advanced thinking in naval architecture and marine engineering. After a period of time the results of more research, and practice within the discipline, will incorporate the most well founded of these into standard practice and discard the dreck. This is pretty much the way of all academic and industrial journals. - not all of what you read is of really high quality.

 

Description

Have the lady use the term "drafting services".

This is the phrase that the rules recognize as explicitly NOT REQUIRING LICENSURE.

 

SNAME Papers

Much of the small craft stuff is published in specialized sympsoium, especially CSYS, or in local section papers.

Too, lot of the stuff that is useful has been published once before, so they won't repeat it.

To address the latter, I understand SNAME is working on a "top hits in small craft design" collection on CD. (Plus if you act now ...), and the old CSYS symposia are available on paper, and soon to be out on CD. (No sailing yacht designer should be without a few key CSYS papers - for example, the data for the current VPPs were all published at CSYS.)

AS far as other papers though, I had one published recently in JSP on a new method of building small metal boats, and a paper on stern flaps in 2001 Transactions, that though about 110 foot patrol boats, is directly applicable to motor yachts. There was a very good paper on porpoising of modern hull forms in 1999 or so, we are working on one on practical assessment of structural loads and design of patrol boats that has application to recreational boats, the lines and actual resistance data of the 47MLB was published in SNAME for anyone to use. There have been a load of papers on CAD/CAM in small yards in both JSP and Transactions and so on. SNAME is offering an online course on FRP sandwich design now - and this isn't about ship building. There was a great paper a year or so ago about the long term structural performance of fiberglass that was based on data gathered on J-24s, and it had some mportant recommendations about what long term allowable loads should be. The paper by Dale Calkins in 1988 or so is about recreational boat design by computer, and includes all of the key algorithms. The Blount Hubble paper in the 1981 propeller symposium is the key to small craft propeller selection, and the computer program "PSOP" that SNAME sells does prop calcs using this data and others as well (and it's under $50 last time I looked).

I have been an SBYD member, and it's a good forum, because they don't need to cover just new material, but SNAME is the place to stay on the cutting edge.

 

A part from this issue, does anybody know a Yocht performance optimizer? I need somebody who really knows its stuff to improve the performance of a IMS racing boat!

 

Contact my friend and colleague Geoffrey Van Gorkom who is quite expert at racing yacht optimization. You can reach him through his website at www.vangorkomyachtdesign.com

Eric

 

I am sorry, make that www.vgyd.com.

Eric

 

Quite simply A Naval Architect is someone trained to design and engineer any objet or vessel predominately operating in or under the water.

A Yacht designer designs yachts. Yacht being accurately defines as a fast vessel, but better known as sailing boats in the UK or fast pleasure craft eleswhere.

There are yacht designers with Naval architecture backgrounds, (usually having a better over all approach to designing a vessel) There are also many with product design, or Civil Architectural backgrounds, usually having a better handle on aesthetics.

Yacht design degrees are simply naval architecture courses that focus a little more on Composites and Aerodynamics.

A good way these days to get into this field is to become and expert in CAD, the common tool for both ship, yacht and for that matter almost anything else. Thus avoiding the poor artist/student situation.

 

Yacht designers generally can work on boats up to 79'. Whereas naval architects generally work on anything that floats (the full spectrum from small boats to very large ships). In a sense yacht design is a specialized segment of naval architecture.

 

In Yachtdesign you have to divide the Designers, the artists that draw the exterior - styling - of the boat, from the specialised construction & engineering bureaux to which the plans go after the deigner finished the Artist's impressions to be worker out furter by the Naval Architect who is responsible for the general construction.

This counts specifically for the BIG yachtdesign, say from 20 mtrs upwards. A yachtdesigner therefore is not necessarily a Naval Architect.

The complex strutures and engineering problems of the large yacht building requires a comprehensive knowhow that a Non NA generally doesn't have.

A manual of building specifications contains for a 45 mtr yacht over 160 pages - it requires the know how of a NA to write such a book.

 

PE licensing in Florida

Here in Florida, I have been working for the last two years to address the needs of the naval architects, marine engineers, small craft designers and yacht designers to see what level of licensing they want. I have also established a dialog with the appropriate engineering authority in the state to keep them apprised of our efforts. I created the Ad Hoc Committee on PE Licensing in Florida to address the issue, and to conduct an Internet/email survey of boat design practitioners to get a sense of what they wanted in the way of licensure.

The consensus of opinion is that the practitioners, by a very large majority, DO NOT WANT ANY PE LICENSING, or at best, want the very least amount of PE licensing that may be necessary. To that end, the Ad Hoc Committee, with the help of a state senator and a representative, has drafted legislation called THE MARINE PROFESSIONS BILL, to exempt from PE licensing for: "naval architects, marine engineers, yacht designers, small craft designers, and design professionals involved in marine vessel repair or modification." However, if you wish to get a PE license in these fields, then you are allowed to do so by the regular means of taking exams and proving competency in work history.

This issues are complicated, but can be distilled down to this:

1. As of right now, the state of Florida is enforcing the engineering law to the letter against naval architects, marine engineers, and anyone who practices in the field. If you are a small craft or yacht designer, and you so much as do a hydrostatic or stability calculation, the state says you are practicing in the field which is against the law without a license. The penalties for breaking the law are to CEASE AND DESIST ALL PRACTICE, and the state has the authority to FINE YOU UP TO $5,000 PER INCIDENT. To refuse to obey the penalties is itself a criminal offense.

2. The law applies to the persons doing the practice, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the type of vessel that is being designed.

3. The state recognizes that there are no safety issues pending regarding marine vessels, and that right now, the public safety in not in any jeopardy, either in general or in any particular. There are no pending incidents or cases that are calling the safety of marine vessels of any type into question.

4. The state recognizes that PE licensing for naval architects and marine engineers came to be by default, thanks to the sudden existence of the NA and ME Principles and Practices examination, supplied by SNAME and the NCEES, which came into being in 1999.

5. The state has to enforce the law, but if we want to rewrite the law and get it passed, we are free to do so. We have only to marshall the necessary resources together to get the job done.

6. All vehicles of every type--planes, trains, automobiles, motorcycles, bicycles, golf carts, go carts, and even spacecraft--can be transported across state lines, and therefore, are generally beyond the scope of authority by any individual state. Design and engineeing professionals of all these types of vehicles are exempted from PE licensure, sometimes specifically as here in Florida, from PE licensure. So far, right now, MARINE VESSELS ARE THE ONLY VEHICLES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO PE LICENSURE OF DESIGN AND ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS. Therefore, if the PE licensing law becomes too onerous, as it seems here in Florida, then the marine community suffers greatly because all of the design and engineering work will go to other states or countries where the laws are less strict. Rhode Island, for example, chooses to NOT LICENSE marine professionals. If you want to design boats, move to Rhode Island--if you can stand the winters!

7. The state has neither oversight nor jurisdiction on design and engineering practice of marine vehicles outside the state. The state has no standards for design and construction of marine vehicles. The state has no inspection authority or standards over marine vehicles. Once a vessel is designed, from whatever source, it can be built here in the state of Florida. The state has no authority or standards covering the practices of boat and ship builders, nor do they have the authority to inspect the builders and their work.

8. Design and construction standards for marine vehicles exist with the federal government US Coast Guard (33 and 46 CFRs, recreational and commercial vehicles, repectively), the industry (ABYC), and the Classification Societies (ABS, Lloyds, Det Norske Veritas, Bureau Veritas, RINA, etc.). All of these authorities DO NOT REQUIRE PE LICENSURE for the design and engineering of marine vessels. In fact, the vast majority of the practitioners within these authorities ARE NOT PE LICENSED.

9. To impose mandatory PE licensure on the marine industry will wreak havoc within the recreational boat industry particularly, and the shipbuilding industry, and the repair and modification business for marine vehicles. One does not have to go back too far in memory (1992) to recall what happened with the Luxury Tax! The recreational boat industy imploded and all high-end boat design, construction and sales went offshore. The same will happen here if mandatory PE licensing continues. There simply aren't enough PEs around to handle what could be a whole lot of licensing work! The design and engineering work will go out of state, and the big repair and modification business, now very vibrant in Florida, will go out of state--back up to Rhode Island, particularly.

10. When all of the above are considered, does it really make any sense to require marine design and engineering professionals to be licensed? Absolutely not!

If you live in the state of Florida and are a marine design professional, I urge you to contact your local state legislators to voice your support for the MARINE PROFESSIONS BILL. If you wish to voice your support directly to our sponsors, which will be a big help, please contact me privately, and I will give you the necessary contact information. THIS MUST HAPPEN NOW--WE ARE NOT YET GUARANTEED THAT OUR BILL WILL BE INTRODUCED! If you live outside the state of Florida and would like a copy of our Bill for dealing with this issue in your state, again, contact me directly and I will email it to you.

In the end, I always encourage design professionals to obtain the PE license, simply because, overall, it will likely make you a better professional and more respected in your field. On the other hand, PE licensing has the power to put good people out of business, and that simply is not right. Our MARINE PROFESSIONS BILL explicity defines the practices of our fields, and makes the PE license voluntary. This is the best of all worlds at the professional level.

Eric