need help with plans

Oh, you must not warn me, it is completely unimportant if I like a material or not.
Your choice anyway, but a terrible bad choice for a tugboat.
As mentioned by PDW, the final value of your boat will be close to zero, but the cost will be at least as high as for a steel boat. And it will never stand any tugboat service, no matter what the snakeoil sales drivel tells you.

I made my comments already here:http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/bo...-thickness-use-fc-tug-32369-4.html#post411933

I am out of here.

Good luck
Richard

 

Post your plans here and I'll comment. Or send them to me if you are shy.

But someone's put kangaroos in your top paddock
You cannot beat steel for durability in adverse situations . If anyone's telling you a ferralight hull is stronger and robust they are so ignorant it's criminal. And I'd be happy to go over the facts with you.
Ask the salesman the shear strength of the material for a start! You'll also find they are comparing A36 yield with ferralight rupture which nicely ignores the reserve strength steel has before it finally ruptures.

As for chines and performance. A properly placed chine can actually reduce the hull resistance and there's a lot of current testing along those lines, even for racing sailboat hulls,
Even poorly placed chines aren't too bad providing they are more or less aligned to the flow underway in the forward part of the vessel. A radiused chine using a constant rolled section is easy to insert with care but time consuming and hard to do well yourself.

I'd suggest a softened chine aft above the waterline for aesthetics but it's not necessary for performance.
I have seen many attempts at a radiused chine that would have looked so much better if they had simply opted for a softened hard chine.

There have been very large salvage tugs build with entirely flat panels fwd with no curvature in any direction they look very 'cubic' but still perform surprisingly well, as a general rule provided your flow lines are not asked to follow angles less than 130 degrees they don't shed vortices ( no increased resistance).

For ease of building sheet boats (and ease of repair) you cannot beat fully developable plates. Steel is the most forgiving material by a country mile for amateur construction.

Don't get talked into wonder products by fast talking salesman. Post the material specs here at least for starters.

 

No no stay, if we gang up on him maybe we can talk some sense to his confused rebellious inner self.

 

Take 2 examples of really, really hard service vessels. Ice breakers and tug boats. I spent 11 years working with ice breakers.

Now show me one, built anywhere, ever, that has been built from FC or fer-a-lite. It hasn't happened and it isn't going to happen because it's a totally inappropriate material for the job.

The first time a big load comes onto a bitt or pintle or whatever attached to a FC or fer-a-lite deck is the time that a big chunk of that deck peels right out of the boat. Hell, I've sheared 8 24mm bolts holding a hydraulic winch down to a steel deck when it got heavily loaded up. An engineer did that design and I never did think it was any good (lucky it wasn't you, Mike....)

PDW

 

Wood, Wood, Wood,wood, Wood Followed By A Fiberglass Overlay Or Dynal
Or Even A Stronger Fiber Material. Wood Lasts Generations.

 

Aha,
hello comrade!
Made my master on Icebreakers in the Baltic. 13 Ice campaigns spread over 18 years.

Mike,

I still hope we can convince him. Tad tried also on the related thread.

Lets hope our united force will manage to steer him away from disappointment or desaster.

Richard

 

hehe-- good luck on that!

 

Hi Mike- I actually actively pursued the product when i heard about it..The salesman didnt say much...have you ever seen this stuff??? until you see it in action --regardless of your opinion NOW- then comment..I know steel is strong--but this is comparable...I worked on Tugs also a 65 ft twin screw and three 90 ft'ers. pushing barges-- steel is easily bent punctured etc...its not the miracle material that you and others make it out to be--plus its three times the cost if done to the scantlings I have...the difference between cost and strength makes the extra cost not cost effective in comparison to cost/strength...

 

Richard--the Distaster might end up being--that you guys could all be wrong???.ouch!.. lol all said in the spirit of fun!!...ill just have to prove to you guys--itll be "I" who cracks the ferro-police's denial before its over...(winking)!

cheers to all

 

ill pit my 1 inch thick fer-a-lite hull against 1/3 inch steel any time in ice!!!

 

PDW- Just cuz it aint built dont mean it aint good! besides there were a few C-logger deisgns built--see above pdf...in ferro...

 

see responses in bold

 

As I assumed, that seems to be senseless.

Tugboat,

you will be extremely surprised in the end, both costwise and about the vessel you built.

But make your own experience. Sure we are all wrong.

edit: in Ice I break your boat in one second! Even with 5in. hull thickness.

Richard

btw
Mike has forgotten more about FC boats than you probably will ever learn.

 

cool-- name the place and time!!..im up for that bet...if i win i get your boat!
Im sure mike knows his stuff too...not syaing he doesnt but were tlaking something else not F.C. ill do a test slab and youtube the destruction of it...hows that?

 

Don´t make bets you cannot win.