Hullform, Am I on the right thrack here?

I've spent most of the evening converting my simple drawing into a Freeship model and I think I have it ironed out. I want to get people's input before I start building the model of the hull.



P.S., how do you convince Freeship to put on a Transom?

 

One way is to select the control points on transom edge and then create a new face. The other is to select the transom edges and extrude.

In both cases you would most often then adjust the number of control points on the new edges and change settings for all the control points as "corners". With your model you would also "crease" the transom edges.

 

{quote]Am I on the right thrack here?[/quote}
What track would that be? No offense, but I can't imagine what purpose that set of shapes might be good for. Essentially, you've "designed" a flat bottom boat with odd facets in it.

 

Cthippo:
A hull form depends on the task it is required to perform. So your question cannot be answered if you don't state your design goals.
The hull in the pic looks like a loaded river barge or a canal boat. Is that what you are trying to design?
Cheers!

 

This is the current hull design for my Kayak Tender. The shape is driven by the desire to maximize interior volume while keeping almost the entirety of the living space within the hull so as to keep the deck clear for storing kayaks. Intended use is inland (inside passage) with the possibility of traveling down the coast.

Here is the SOR I promulgated a while back with some updates...

Current dimensions are 42' x 10' with a design draft of 4', though the last is probably unrealistic.

 

that flat bottom looks ideal to navigate in a 8' sea...

can I be frank?
that's not a kayak, it's quite a big project with remarkable costs involved. what's the point of saving maybe 5% or less of design fees to get it done properly by a professional naval architect? (and often with his help you'll save in building costs more than what you spent to hire him).
i understand the fun and satisfaction of designing it by yourself, but most likely you'll screw it and waste a lot of money and efforts.

But above all it's a matter of safety. Sea cruising can be dangerous, and the designer is responsible for the safety of the crew.
How can you feel fine taking out your family on a boat, in a possibly dangerous situation, knowing that it was designed by somebody with no clue about naval architecture?
In my opinion there's nothing better than the feeling that you can fully rely on your boat also in rough conditions, while there's nothing worse than the opposite.

 

I plan to take it to a NA for approval and modification before I start building, but sine I have yet to see a stock plan that meets my needs I have to start somewhere. My intention is to get the design as far as I can on my own, with input from those more knowledgeable then myself, and then hand it off to a professional to be finalized.

 

You might want to get Harry Sucher's book ,Simplified Boatbuilding: The V-Bottom Boat , from the library and take a look. Also take a look at George Buehler's site . He has some boats designs very close to what you have in mind.

 

Ok, that's wise. Though I'm not sure it'll be easy to find a NA available to take over and finalize your design.
I mean, perhaps you get a bit of discount because he can skip some preliminary stages, but to fully check that the design is sound he'll have to ''re-design it'' and make the main calculations from scratch (the scantling for example).

About your box ... my suggestion is to give more deadrise to the bottom, especially in the forward area.
This will help reducing the slamming loads, improve maneuverability and the boat will be more stable in keeping the course.