Preliminary calculation of Intact Stability

Tansl,
It is not necessary to spit upwind because there is a high probability to spit the own natural muzzle!
Не надо плевать против ветра, потому что есть большая вероятность наплевать свою собственную морду!
___________________________
NA Razmik Baharyan

 

For our words you will know us.
I just wanted a technical explanation.

 

Tansl,
It is better for you to leave from my publication. You are unworthy even to read it! Except for that I have already lost interest to discuss with you because you do not deserve to waste the time for your learning.
I do not want to fill in gaps in your knowledge! Stay not learned so it will be better and for remaining in the forum.
Тебе лучше уйти от мою публикацию. Ты недостоен даже читать ее! Кроме того я уже потерял интерес дискутировать с тобой, потому что ты не заслуживаешь терять времени на твое обучение.
Я не хочу заполнять пробелы в твоих знаний! Оставайся ненаученным, так лучше будет и для остальных в форуме.
_____________________________________
NA Razmik Baharyan

 

Well, you have disqualified me as you pleased. Okay, I guess you've vented and you are now quieter, could you answer my question (N = 0)?. For my part, we're done, thanks.

 

Hi All,
This time I appeal to all ship-building experts!
I shall not admit intervention in my publications of such people as Tansl. He dishonours our trade. For a long time already it is time to him to refuse from active "competitive" function. The person with hazed and manic consciousness, from the poor competence and to dropouts in the knowledge is impossible to influence your estimations about my projects.
I shall be glad to hear and your unbiassed comments.
And that you did not have a doubt that I know as to project tugs and push boats, I can explain: In Rules of construction of ocean vessels as well in IMO there is no special paragraph how to calculate a stability of a tug at circulation. For this purpose I as designer can accept too the requests which concern to passenger carriers that is an allowable heel angle to not exceed 10 deg.
For river service tugs approximately on internal water ways of Europe the request it is a little bit others - the combined action of the heeling moment from the wind and circulations there is calculated, but at an allowable heel angle 15 deg.
На этот раз я обращаюсь к всем судостроительным специалистам!
Я не допущу вмешательство в моих публикациях таких людей как Tansl. Он позорит нашу специальность. Ему давно уже пора отказаться от активную „состязательную“ деятельность. Человек с затуманенном и маниакальном сознанием, с недостаточной компетенции и пропускам в своих знаний нельзя повлиять на ваши оценки о моих проектов.
Я буду рад услышать и ваших непредубежденных комментариев.
А для того чтобы у вас не были сомнения что я знаю как проектировать буксиры и толкачи, могу обьяснить: В Правилах постройки морских судов, также и в IMO нет специальный параграф как вычислить остойчивость буксира при циркуляции. Для этого я как проектант могу принять тоже самые требования которые относятся к пассажирским судам то есть допустимый угол крена не превышать 10 deg.
Для речных буксирах примерно по внутренним водным путям Европы требование несколько иное - там вычисляется совместное действие кренящего момента от ветра и циркуляции, но при допустимом угле крена 15 deg.
_________________________________
NA Razmik Baharyan

 

Hello everybody,
What it was necessary to make if to stability criteria of the International code will add extra one more? Such event we have in Rules of Russian Marine Register, 2014.
There the following additional criterion figures:
2.2.4 The angle of downflooding should be not less than 50 deg. At smaller value floating only as for vessels of a restricted navigation area can be authorized...
What it is possible to make that the unlimited navigation area was not changed? It is necessary to increase an angle of flooding as follows:
1. It is necessary to introduce the following text to the Stability booklet:
„ All watertight doors leading from Main Deck in superstructure at storm weather should be closed as well as all hatches and manholes on Main Deck.
2. At this position the angle of flooding does not depend from the coaming height of doors to a superstructure, and from higher the arranged opening for ventilation of ER, located in funnels on PS and SB.
What coordinates of new critical points will be:
X=15,4m; Y = +/-3,3m; Z=9,2m

Here is how it will be mirrored on the righting lever curve / see the file/:
K = Area B / Area A = 6,94 > 1
Downflooding angle = 55,2 deg> 50 deg
Deck immersion angle = 15,71 deg remains without change

Что следовало бы сделать если к критериям остойчивости Международного кода добавит дополнительно еще один? Такой случай имеем в Правилах Русского Морского Регистра, 2014.
Там фигурирует следующий дополнительный критерий:
2.2.4 Угол заливания должен быть не менее 50 deg. При меньшем значении судам может быть разрешено плавание лишь как для судов ограниченного района плавания ...
Что можно сделать чтобы не изменился неограниченный район плавания? Надо повысить угол заливания следующим образом:
1. В Информацию об остойчивости надо внести следующий текст:
„Все водонепроницаемые двери ведущие от ГП в надстройке при штормовом погоде обязательно надо быть закрытыми как и все люки и горловины на ГП.
2. При этом положении угол заливания не зависит от высоту комингса дверей к надстройке, а от выше расположенных вырезов для вентиляции МО, находящиеся в дымоходов левого и правого борта.
Вот какие будут координаты новых критических точек:
X=15,4m; Y=+/- 3,3m; Z=9,2m

Вот как отразится это на диаграмму статической остойчивости / смотри файл /:
K = Area B / Area A = 6,94 > 1
Угол заливания = 55,2 deg > 50 deg
Угол входа палубы в воду = 15,71 deg остается без изменения
______________________________
NA Razmik Baharyan

 

I think there are great difficulties with translation from Bulgarian(?) to English.

For example, here is your English text.

This time I appeal to all ship-building experts!
I shall not admit intervention in my publications of such people as Tansl. He dishonours our trade. For a long time already it is time to him to refuse from active "competitive" function. The person with hazed and manic consciousness, from the poor competence and to dropouts in the knowledge is impossible to influence your estimations about my projects.
I shall be glad to hear and your unbiassed comments.
And that you did not have a doubt that I know as to project tugs and push boats, I can explain: In Rules of construction of ocean vessels as well in IMO there is no special paragraph how to calculate a stability of a tug at circulation. For this purpose I as designer can accept too the requests which concern to passenger carriers that is an allowable heel angle to not exceed 10 deg.
For river service tugs approximately on internal water ways of Europe the request it is a little bit others - the combined action of the heeling moment from the wind and circulations there is calculated, but at an allowable heel angle 15 deg.


That translates to Russian as:

Всем привет,
На этот раз я обращаюсь ко всем экспертам судостроительных!
Я не признаю вмешательства в моих публикациях таких людей, как Tansl. Он позорит нашу торговлю. В течение долгого времени уже пора ему отказаться от активной конкурентной "" функции. Человек с издевались и маниакально сознания, от плохого компетенции и отсева в знании невозможно влиять на ваши оценки о моих проектах.
Буду рад услышать и ваши объективную комментарии.
И что у вас не было сомнения, что я знаю, как проектировать буксиров и толкачей, я могу объяснить: В Правилах строительства морских судов, а также в ИМО нет специальный параграф, как рассчитать устойчивость буксира при хождении. Для этого я, как дизайнер может принять слишком запросы, которые относятся к пассажирских перевозчиков, который является допустимый угол пятки не превышает 10 градусов.
Для обслуживания речных буксиров примерно на внутренних водных путях Европы запросу он немного другие - комбинированное действие с момента крена от ветра и циркуляции там, рассчитанных, но в допустимом угол крена 15 градусов.

And to Bulgarian as:

Този път се обръщам към всички експерти кораб изграждане!
Аз не допуска намеса в моите публикации на такива хора като Tansl. Той позори нашата търговия. За вече дълго време, че е време да му да се откаже от активна "конкурентна" функция. Лицето, с неясен и маниакална съзнание, от бедни компетентност и да отпадналите в знанието, е невъзможно да се повлияе на вашите оценки за моите проекти.
Аз ще се радвам да чуя и вашите unbiassed коментари.
И това ли не е имал съмнение, че аз знам, че да се проектира влекачи и бутнете лодки, мога да обясня: В Правилника за изграждане на океански съдове, както и в IMO не съществува специална точка, как да се изчисли стабилност на влекач в обращение. За тази цел аз като дизайнер може да приеме твърде исканията, които се отнасят до пътническите превозвачи, които е допустимо ъгъл на петата да не превишава 10 ° С.
За речния услуга влекачи приблизително по вътрешните водни пътища на Европа искането тя е малко по-други - комбинираното действие на момента на наклона, от вятъра и тиражи там се изчисляват, но при допустим ъгъл на наклон 15 ° С.


You have rejected Tansl's help because you thought he was attacking you.
I didn't read it that way. He was very patient with you.

Some of the things you translated into English sound like they were written by a
retarded child, or a madman. I don't mean you are a lunatic - it is the translation
that is crazy!

What do you think of the Russian and Bulgarian translation from English?
Does it sound like it was written by an idiot?
Would you know for certain if I was attacking you, or would you blame
the translation?

 

Hi Leo,
If the moderator does not clean the spam from the forum, it is necessary I to make it for my publication.
I with pleasure would comment with you any kind problem of technical character relatively my publication.
But as such misses, the conclusion follows that you are not a ship-building expert. If you were those then is inevitable would understand the perfect method with which Tansl manipulates readers with the purpose to discredit my publications under imaginary concern that my English is not understandable or there are not clear things of technical character.
From this that he writes anything is not true. To me already has bothered permanently to explain him of it. Moreover his English is absolutely not perfect.
And at once my logic question follows:
Why do you defend him?
The slops which you have written these at all have no direct relation to a problem which I view!
All this reminds me most likely on the custom-made publication!
Know that each which plays dishonestly and with not permitted impacts will receive deserved on the muzzle or him disqualify, if we speak with boxing terms.
And at last one useful advice - Impossible to be trusted of Google Translate when in the text there is a ship-building nomenclature. Awfully inaccurately and comicality!
__________________________
NA Razmik Baharyan

 

Rabah, my friend, I respectfully want to tell you a few things:
I think make technical questions can not be regarded as span.
Your English is very bad and, as mine is also horrible, on many occasions I am not able to understand what you say. I suppose that many members of this forum will agree with me on this.
You expose your work in this forum, I guess with the intention that the forum members to read and discuss. Nobody forces you to do so. Once you've exposed him, I have full right to comment, as long as I do with respect to you and the forum rules.
In the texts that you post there are things that, in my opinion, are incorrect or, at least, are strange. So many times I ask you to clarify some things and explain the theoretical bases that could serve to explain them. That in no case can be considered a personal attack.
With respect, I insist, I pray again that you answer my questions and if, for some reason, do not want or can not answer, just tell me, that's all.
Only I'll make a personal question (how bad is curiosity!), abusing your kindness and, of course, are on your right not to answer: What institution has given you the title of Naval Architect?

 

Hi Tansl,
What for you ask? In fact you have already read all about me in the my profile on site Linkedin - I have received the message on it. If also other readers are interested I advise to make too most. I have nothing to hide.
________________________
NA Razmik Baharyan

 

Rabah, why you take everything as a personal insult ?. Indeed I have consulted your profile on the Internet and there is nothing that allows me to conclude that you are naval architect. To me that I care very little, do not care about titles and I'll not respect you more for them, but as you sign as NA, it has aroused my curiosity. Can you answer my question without feeling offended ?. Did you get your NA degree in Romania, Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, ...? Thanks.