Open CC - areas confusion iso 12215 5

hello,
I have a hesitation about areas,

in iso, it lacks details about this type of boat,
please, how do I consider these areas?


I think areas 1 to 6 are superstructures,but i m not sure,
area 1 : i'm hesitate between hull side /or superstructure side
area 2 : i'm hesitate between deck /or Upper part of the superestructure
area 3 : side superstructure perhaps?
area 4, central console: should I consider as a deckhouse ?(that is to say a superstructure)
area 5 :motor receptacle, really, i don't know!!


some opinions could help me to go on !

thank you in advance

 

The ISO standard is quite clear but, of course, must be understood. The standard does not speak of non-structural elements, thus these areas should be calculated according to the judgment of the designer.
Zones 1 and 6 in your drawing are bulwarks.
Whatever they are zones 2 and 3, from a construction point of view, it would be a mistake to give them different thicknesses of zone 1.
Zone 5, I do not see well, but could be considered as part of the transom (see ISO 12215-6), although I'm not sure it's the right thing.
Part of what you call "Side" should be considered as "Bottom".
I hope I have helped a little.

 

TAN sl hi, how are you,
not easy to understand,
Indeed, when one is not an architect.

zone 2 and 1 is single skin and the same thickness and zone 3 is sandwich

according to what you said these areas are not taken into account, and therefore it is not necessary to evaluate them with iso standard


"side" : i'm talking about 'muraille' in french.


if what you say is correct, I think you answered my questions, thank you

 

Hi Marlin
1 is "single skin" but is a structural element called bulwark.
Why do you need sándwich in área 3?. I think it is not necessary. The side seats will give sufficient strength.
"Bottom" has to be considered up to full load waterline. Some CS ask to add 150 mm to this eight.
Cheers

 

the side ('muraille' in french) that i talking about (I'm sorry i do not knows the exact term) is above this limit.

as you noticed, this is not my boat, but indeed there is sufficient natural stiffeners on my model,
I favor sandwich because the boat will be built by resin infusion
I planned to use a low density foam for 3,
and less thick, because it is not this is not a very solicited area,the deck is fully supported.

and single skin resin infusion, is not very interesting, because demand more reinforcement to achieve the desired thickness consequently the stiffness, the parts are generally stronger than wet process, but more flexible (for same reinforcements weight)
Areas 1 and 2 are monolithic, for supporting the deck hardware and will be sized according to the required.

 

The infusion method does not require the sandwich structure.
The "U" shape of the 1-2-3 zone gives more than enough rigidity to support the deck hardware of this boat, in my opinión. We have to use, and consider, the sharp edges of the hull as resistant elements.

 

i'm not talking about global stiffness,
but as you know, iso require insert on hard spot,
like plywood, or high density foam, or transition zone sandwich/single skin,
when you fixed the deck hardware, this is what I'm talking about,

I think the best way/easiest to prevent the ingress of moisture is a transition to a monolithic area,to be easier, I decided to make this zone with single skin.

but I do not rule out the possibility of making 3 in single skin / infusion

 

I've been re-reading the rule ISO 15084 "Small craft — Anchoring, mooring and towing — Strong points" and I have not seen any requirement of inserts on strong points. Another different thing is that you deem appropriate to place them.

 

it is in 12215-6,
7.6

 

I know how to build a robust boat, based on my experience, if it continues to be confusing for me, I will not use iso 12215, Category C, it is not mandatory, only the stability is important
(12217)
it is unfortunate because I have everything I need (software) to calculate Easily,
my problem is not the calculation but the interpretation / understanding of the standard.
I know how to calculate, but I do not know what to calculate


I would have used in Annex A (<6m), but there is is not enough space to control after falling

or
I think I'll contact IMCI, it offers an evaluation service for € 475,
call'd: scantlings confirmation
http://imci.org/index.php?nav=89&pageId=57

 

There is nothing in the ISO 12215-6, 7.6, requiring insertions in the laminate. It is an option, not mandatory. I think, actually, you have a serious problem of interpretation of the rule.
I am not able to understand you when you say that you know how to calculate but do not know what to calculate. This is another very serious problem. Others always know what we want and we can have doubts about how to calculate it. Anyway, people are very complicated.
Yes, you're right, you should talk with INCI or someone you are able to trust. Best of luck.

 

Anyway, there I must be in agreement with my choice
Because I'm the first resposable there is a problem,
Also, if I use a standard, I must be able to explain my calculations, and therefore have a perfect metrized the standard,
out on some points I have doubts,

when I talk about IMCI, it's just to reassure me (officialy) that 'scantling is correct, this is an ultimate solution, Because I'm a bit desperate.

I can express myself not very well,
but what I mean,
eg: if someone tells me what to evaluate, I can easily calculate the pressure and get the results, see if it passed the standard or not.

but if I do not know,
eg, if a Panel must be considered in an area or another
I can not evaluate it.

the 12215 standard 6 generally follows the examples of good practice in the marine industry , it provides some additional details in Part 5
from experience , usually we put plywood insert, or transistion to monolithic , not when you screwed the equipment that crushes the foam, and it will thus be on my boat , and I follow the recommendations, I do not see where is the problem , why would you differently ?



this is not because I ask a question on the forum about standards that I 'm stupid , and I have never built a boat, and I have no knowledge in composite , beware !

the problem is that everyone interprets the standard as he understands it , on the same issue can be 10 different answers and different opinions ,

sometimes it is interesting to have several review and understand the vision that everyone has and of course respect the choice of each with diplomacy, while building his own opinion


I would have liked other answers from other users,
it is not against you, tan sl
but I guess that is lost in advance,
fear of contradiction, which has already been said on this thread,
some people will not respond, even if have interesting things to say

who will contradict an experienced architect, ...nobody ...
and yet if my boat sinks one day, I will be responsible,
not a architect.

 

and I think we has gone astray from the main issue,
I do not seek to know if I should make a sandwich or monolithic, but we are talking about areas and standards.

I read on the forum something interesting from another thread:
The definition of superstructure is the part of a ship above the main deck.

On an open boat (of this type), the main deck is the cockpit floor ? no ?

Iso said :
the deck area where passengers are likely to walk,
and cockpit floor and seat (top) are part of the deck,
and superstructure includes areas located above the level of deck
(12215-5 6.2.4)




according to this logic, the parties above the cockpit floor
are superstructures? no?



please, give your opinions !
thank you