Principles of Yacht Design, third edition

Hi all,

I have the first and second editions of this book.
Does anyone know if there are enough differences between the second and third edition of this Larrson/Eliasson book to justify purchasing the new edition?

Thanks!

 

I have the third edition and like it. I haven't read the second edition.
From the preface to the book, I gather the main changes between 2 and 3 are:
- New hydrodynamic formulae based on Delft research data
- Additional seaworthiness information including implementation of ISO 12217-2
- Revised scantling guidelines to include latest from ISO/TC 188/WG 18

 

Thanks, Matt.
I have second edition too, verbertus, thanks for bringing up the matter.

I've only found this, searching internet:
"This handsome new edition of this yacht design reference for boat owners, designers and builders is updated throughout---particularly the calculations of hull and deck thicknesses, or scantlings---and is now printed in two-color throughout for maximum impact and usability of its many elegant illustrations."

Cheers

 

I've asked Rolf Eliasson and here his answer:
".....The greatest differences are in chapter 14, scantlings, since the proposed ISO standard has changed significantly between the editions."
Cheers.

 

Matt and Guillermo,

Thanks for your most useful answers!
Have a nice Sunday,

Bert

 

Something else from Rolf Eliasson:

"The main formula for stix is changed somewhat: STIX = (7+2,25*LBS)*(FDL*FBD*FKR*FIR*FDS*FDF)^0,5 + delta.
To be correct chapters 4 and 5 (Hull, keel and rudder design) are expanded and brought up to date. So, all things considered, I think it would be a good idea for you to get the new edition.
Cheers
Rolf E"

 

Hi Guillermo,

Interesting! So, this means the Wind Moment Factor (FWM) is no longer used in the formula? ( I'm using your spreadsheet, release 4, because it's much better than the one I made , and I just compared the new main formula to that spreadsheet)

Best regards,

 

Oops! You're right, it's missing!
But FWM is still used, of course. I think it's only a typing mistake from Rolf.
Cheers.