Affordable seaworthy cruiser

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by goodwilltoall, Jul 31, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 824
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    one more
     

    Attached Files:

  2. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 824
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    what would you guys recommend for windows. my intentions is 3/8" temp/laminated for 3 front and 1/4" laminated for the rest.

    I think the 7" ports already on are 1/4" temp/laminated
     
  3. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 14,549
    Likes: 680, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Does that last photo show the aft end of the keel as square or is it a shadow?
     
  4. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 824
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    Gonzo,
    Yes its squared, whats the penalty for that

    Plan was to fair during haulout, wanted to save time getting in water
     
  5. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 14,549
    Likes: 680, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    It will decrease thrust and increase vibration. That is caused by each time the blades are behind the keel. With a two blade propeller it can be quite severe.
     
  6. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 824
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    Thought it would be just more fuel use, that sounds severe, one more thing to take care of b4 putting in.
     
  7. Voxsolus
    Joined: Mar 2020
    Posts: 11
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: Australia

    Voxsolus Junior Member

    Greetings from Queensland, Australia, "goodwilltoall". I have recently come on board and am interested in your design work for the 6:1 hull length: beam ratio and the "inspired" notes on your various drawings... To be true to Noachic ratio and form, the boat height: beam ratio should also be 3:5, but this ratio is good for Barges ( the word barge comes from " Barca" which in turn derives from an "Ark") and not entirely optimum for sailing vessels..Some Noachic ratio things to consider are:

    1. Volume ( height, depth and breadth- height first) is key at 465000 ( including the 1 cubit above the 30 cubit height of the vessel);
    2. The 30 height ratio must INCLUDE above deck superstructure ( which Bolger EXCEEDS in his designs and therefore negates the Noachic ratio) since above deck superstructure was incorporated in the overall dimensions of the Ark;
    3. The recently-discovered Kinneret sailing boat from the sea of Galilee dated to exactly 2000 years, whose shape resembles an Olive Leaf and has a length to beam ratio of @ 4:1 is the optimum sail boat ratio as opposed to Noahs Ark being the optimum BARGE boat ratio;
    4. Weight and density of the tongue and mortise laid CYPRESS wood ( in ancient times called " Kopher" or " Gopher" wood)... Typical Cypress has the following attributes: Green density is about 770 kg/m3, air-dry density about 680 kg/m3, and basic density about 580 kg/m3. Tangential and radial shrinkage of mature wood before reconditioning are 2.8 % and 2.1 % respectively, and after reconditioning both are 2.1 %.

    There is a perfect solution to this ratio dilemma, however, which is found in the dimensions of the Ark of the Covenant, and which relates directly and perfectly to the dimensions of the Ark of Noah AND the Kinneret boat. The Kinneret boat incorporated 12 different species of trees/ lumber in its construction whereas the Ark of Noah only one- Cypress...

    Would be keen to communicate via email if I could. My email is imprintsofeternity@gmail.com.... Great work and love the notes.... Voxsolus
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2020
  8. peterAustralia
    Joined: Mar 2006
    Posts: 360
    Likes: 26, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 233
    Location: Melbourne Australia

    peterAustralia Senior Member

    Assume last post was sarcasm? Aside, for a long time I read the author's name for this thread as -- good-will-toal -- which i did not understand, apparently it is good-will-to-all. Aside the ark was round and made of reeds. Covered in bitumen. Read Ian Finkel's book about it, they found a cuneiform tablet about the flood story and it said the ark was round. Realistically it was small, from mesopotamia, carried a family and some farm animals, got hit by storm surge, and hit a small rise of earth to the north, that is the wind, sea water, waves carried it inland. Also if you read Genesis, what happened after the ark landed, Noah got drunk, argry and naked. I kid you not, read the passage for yourself
     
  9. Voxsolus
    Joined: Mar 2020
    Posts: 11
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: Australia

    Voxsolus Junior Member

    Hi "peterAustralia"..... Unfortunately for Ian Finkel and his confused ilk, the actual Ark of Noah has been rediscovered on Mount Ararat, and revisited and filmed more than once since 2010 after a Hong Kong expedition entered and filmed inside the structure at @ 13,000 feet elevation ( where no trees exist or can survive).. It is certainly not round in construction nor made of reeds, but is absolutely enormous and of very solid mortise and tenon constructed timber and pitched internally and externally with pitch.. It is exactly true to the original Genesis narrative... Whether you choose to believe the Genesis account herein or not is irrelevant to this thread, since " goodwilltoall" is sincere about his Faith and literal interpretation of Genesis enough to base a desire for a workable nautical geometry on it. I was being absolutely serious in my post above and am making a sincere contribution to his thread, with no desire to belittle his beliefs or dreams... I think it unfair in many regards to attempt debunking such beliefs, since the religion of unbelief is a religion of a sort as well... I want to contribute a needed correction to his geometry and reasoning and have no pleasure in debunking, belittling or getting into irreligious or religious polemics. I believe goodwilltoall has stumbled, like Phil Bolger, on a very valid geometry, but has, like Bolger, misconstrued the ratio and purpose a little. I would hope you and others would refrain from attacks on the Faith behind the facts of such geometry and with sincerity and openness contribute support or critique as the need may warrant.... Regards from Voxsolus
     
  10. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 824
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    Voxsulus,
    1. 450,000 would be volume if it was a complete box (possible but highly unlikely)

    2. Yes, complete height including superstructure could have been included in the dimensions given or maybe not, I assume area above hull was small in proportion to rest of the hull and built for ventilation.
    Hull height 30 (10% of hull length which is 300 LOD).

    This is the hardest aspect because to get standing hdrm for a 6' man hull length has to be 70' or more. It is a critical design factor that reduces windage while in harmony with the immersed portions below the waterline that prevent wild erratic drifting. This is one time I would tend to agree with Beebe's A/B ratio as for a given hull height, the more that is below water the more windage is reduced. Works well for a heavy laden ultimate survival boat. I'm considering eventually a 60' at 20,000# ultralight which would have a small area below water and possibly detrimental effects. Try to keep to Noah's ratios but compromises have to be made, designing to those ratios the boat would be overly heavy, long and difficult to helm by minimal crew

    2b. Bolger never intended to use Ark dimensions but did know sharpies need 6:1 L/B ratios, he perhaps attributed the surprisingly good seakeeping qualities to other factors besides length since he only designed only 2 other sea boats to those dimensions, the 96' x 16' Banks and surprisingly the last AS39 built which was lengthened to 45' with a pointy bow. Both designed with tall hulls= high windage.

    Marhcaj hints at the desirable qualities of long length for ultimate safety but without any boats of those dimensions built or racing at the time to compare (only longer than typical boats) he goes on to other factors

    I believe that given the narrow beam this type of design needs close to maximum initial stability which is achieved using the "Bolger Box", once you drift into lower ratios the greater the negative characteristics become of a flat bottom and almost unbearable for a seagoing vessel of less than 4:1.

    Bolger used upswept rocker above the waterline at both ends which equaled 50% of beam (8.0 foot beam would make 4.0 feet of hull above WL at each end). This made it easier to tack, more capable in rough surf as proven by the surf dories which also have high rockered ends, and less wetted area.
    To this I would only add the rounded/V'ed ends he used on his later designs such as "Topaz" beginning right at WL level of each end, this would:
    1. Give maximum waterline length and increased speed.
    2. Reduce slapping.
    3. Keep a mostly flat bottom which I mentioned is necessary for long length/shallow boats and still give good tacking, minimal increase in WA and weight

    3. Is irrelevant as its outside of Scripture and design factors given by God to weather and survive the most violent storm mankind ever experienced.
    4. Yes it was built of wood but what is the purpose of all those statistics and guesstimates.
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2020
  11. Voxsolus
    Joined: Mar 2020
    Posts: 11
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: Australia

    Voxsolus Junior Member

    Greetings from Queensland " goodwilltoall".....

    The Hong Kong expedition of @ 2010 entered Noah's ark and did discover a very slight curvature to presumed bow area... The seaworthiness of the Ark geometry implies that the overall dimensions are not exceeded including superstructure... This would mean that the total dimensions of the ark include superstructure above deck values, otherwise the vessel complies with barge qualities and certainly not sail... @ 465,000 volume would include the single cubit rise delineated in Genesis, but in all respects both hull height and superstructure must be included in the 31 cubit vessel height- therefore a barge only... The volume without the 1 cubit rise, as you correctly pointed out, is 450,000.... A non-royal cubit was about 17.5 inches and could never account for the entire superstructure value. I am a supporter of Bolger design in general but am trying to point out that the nautical geometry of Genesis does not apply to sail- only barge, and that for perfection in sail geometry there are other Biblical precedents that ought to be considered.... Regards from Voxsolus
     
  12. Voxsolus
    Joined: Mar 2020
    Posts: 11
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: Australia

    Voxsolus Junior Member



    P.S: The Kinneret sailing boat is believed to have been of exactly the same design as used by Peter and Andrew etc and from which type of vessel Jesus preached and often sailed in during his didactic excursions with the Apostles... So in reality it is quite within the confines of Scripture... Voxsolus
     
  13. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 824
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    I guess if you refer to optimal sailing qualities 6:1 ratios can be even faster than the more typical 3:1 for a given displacement at the same time offering greater safety at sea.
    For instance let's say 60'x10' (6:1) vs 43'x 14 (3:1) both close to 600sf in plan view. The 60' would do 7.75kts at vl 1.0 with hardly any pressure on sails, the 43' would do 6.56kts and need a decent wind to a achieve 7.75kts at a vl 1.18 in which case the 60' would be going even faster and to top it off possibly reach a vl 1.5 which long narrow boats are known to do but impossible on fat boats
     
  14. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 824
    Likes: 22, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    The Kinneret is a type that was discovered as many others have throughout ages however, only the Ark has specific dimensions given in Scripture with a specific purpose/task to accomplish which it splendidly did. We can use those proven parameters today to optimize safety at sea
     

  15. Voxsolus
    Joined: Mar 2020
    Posts: 11
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: Australia

    Voxsolus Junior Member

    Hi goodwilltoall.... The purpose of the Ark design was solely to serve as a non-propulsed barge... It was not designed for sail or propulsion excepting that occasioned by sea motion and currents ( or, in today's terms, by inboard motors etc)... A coffin can be as "seaworthy" as a barge in many respects, yet its purpose is different... The Kinneret boat was also depicted in famous mosaics in first century churches... The boat construction and design was standard then in the sea of Galilee, and it is shaped like an olive leaf ( reminiscent typologically of the dove returning to Noah with a leaved olive branch) with a 4:1 ratio.... The purpose of the Ark of Noah has been missed... It is seaworthy for preservation, but dimensionally not designed for sail propulsion like the Kinneret boat.... The optimal sailing qualities we are discussing are multifarious, and can never include speed only, or stability only, or buoyancy only etc etc... We are talking about optimum perfection and PURPOSE behind Biblical nautical geometry and architecture, which is why we are both attracted to the dimensions and qualities of the Ark of Noah.. Yet if we copy design without incorporating the original purpose, we may end up in reality sailing a coffin rather than an optimum boat... The Ark of Noah is a perfect barge but imperfect sailing vessel.... I would encourage anyone who studies the geometry of all the ARKS and boats depicted in Scripture ( Noah, Moses and Bulrushes, Ark of the Covenant, Jesus and the Apostles' vessel etc) to seek out dimensional correspondences ( they do exist in perfection) and from these the needed ratios for the construction of optimum ( though perhaps not entirely perfect) scriptural-based vessels- each one true to purpose rather than just design- which may readily be ascertained.... For example, most do not realise that the Ark of the Covenant geometry serves as an exact " building block" for the geometry of the Ark of Noah.... (Would rather discuss this aspect by email if you are interested).... It is also related to curved hull surfaces by area and volume redistribution in design, such as the Kinneret boat..... It may even be applied to multihull design since the Ark of the Covenant had a central main form which was supported and " carried" by two " outrigger poles" borne aloft by priests..... We now get into the realm of Biblical typology, yet cannot escape the fact that ALL the Ark architecture and geometry in Scripture is perfectly correlated one with the other..... Original purpose and intent for any geometric and architectural scriptural form cannot be ignored... Our own safety at sea will depend on it....
     
Loading...
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.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.