Revision of ISO 12217 - Small craft - Stability & buoyancy

Discussion in 'Stability' started by Convenor 12217, Jan 18, 2013.

  1. Convenor 12217
    Joined: Jan 2013
    Posts: 9
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 13
    Location: Southampton, UK

    Convenor 12217 Convenor 12217

    This note is to advise you all that this standard, first published in 2002, has just been fully revised and will be republished very soon. The major changes are:

    - definitions of weights and loading conditions, including introduction of 'loaded arrival' condition for some requirements

    - definition of and requirements for multihulls (power and sail) considered to be susceptible to inversion, including 'viable means of escape' and 'means of escape' (arising out of changes to the European Recreational Craft Directive)

    - limitations on recess size, now based on the actual shape of the recess

    - means of detecting and removing water

    - the offset load test (per 2009 amendments)

    - calculation of wind heeling moments for non-sailing boats

    - STIX calculations for monohull sailing boats

    - many of the requirements for sailing multihulls

    - design and sizing of safety signs

    Many detailed clarifications and editorial improvements have been made.

    When you get a copy, if you have any queries I would be happy to try and answer them.

    Convenor 12217
     
  2. TANSL
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 5,864
    Likes: 220, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 300
    Location: Spain

    TANSL Senior Member

    Iso 12217-1

    This is an attempt to help to complete the information required by ISO 12217-1. I beg a critical analysis of the program, with suggestions for improvement or error detection.
    If work in general is interesting, I will continue with the ISO 12217-2 and 3.
    Thanks for the help

    NOTE: You must enable macros
     

    Attached Files:

  3. ABoatGuy
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 208
    Likes: 6, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 79
    Location: LeftCoast

    ABoatGuy Member

    Any update on the release of the version?
     
  4. TANSL
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 5,864
    Likes: 220, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 300
    Location: Spain

    TANSL Senior Member

    We are debugging the first version we have made, the 2002 and checking their interest in the market. Depending on public acceptance, we will launch the latest version of ISO 12217-1, -2 and -3.
     
  5. rxcomposite
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 2,007
    Likes: 185, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1110
    Location: Philippines

    rxcomposite Senior Member

    Many thanks TANSL.
     
  6. TANSL
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 5,864
    Likes: 220, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 300
    Location: Spain

    TANSL Senior Member

  7. Alik
    Joined: Jul 2003
    Posts: 2,773
    Likes: 163, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 1306
    Location: Thailand

    Alik Senior Member

    How can we get preliminary version of updated ISO12217 text? I am working on small craft standards for RS, needs to be ISO-compliant...
     
  8. rxcomposite
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 2,007
    Likes: 185, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1110
    Location: Philippines

    rxcomposite Senior Member

    Must be the influence of Excel. The macro command prompted me to respond quickly in the shortest possible way.:D

    Had a brief stint using ISO standard to comply with EU certification thus I appreciate it. We were working with words instruction and forms then. No Excel.
     
  9. Convenor 12217
    Joined: Jan 2013
    Posts: 9
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 13
    Location: Southampton, UK

    Convenor 12217 Convenor 12217

    Revised version of ISO 12217

    ABoatGuy: I am unclear whether you were asking about TANSL's spreadsheet or the standard itself. If it was the latter, then the ISO website says the new edition of ISO 12217 has been available since 20 Feb this year.

    Alik: ISO standards can normally be purchased through your national standards organisation - in the UK the British Standards Institution. Failing that you can visit http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store.htm.
     
  10. Claus Riepe
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 70
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 9
    Location: Germany

    Claus Riepe Junior Member

    I think the ISO 12217-3 is outright dangerous.

    Here is a case from real life, this summer. Skipper and two crew go out in an open class C boat. Boat turtles, all three together cannot right her again, crew has a lucky escape swimming to a rock, skipper stays with upturned hull and dies.

    ISO requires boats to be stable or 'stiff', and to carry crew when swamped. But then, such boats are often also very stable in the inverted position and then they may turn out to be too stable to be righted again by their crew.

    I am critical that ISO does NOT make it mandatory that all small sailing boats must successfully perform a practical capsize recovery test for getting a D or C marking.
     
  11. Convenor 12217
    Joined: Jan 2013
    Posts: 9
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 13
    Location: Southampton, UK

    Convenor 12217 Convenor 12217

    Hi Claus,
    Thank you for your post on ISO 12217-3.
    In order to respond properly can you please describe the boat to which you refer? Is it sailing or non-sailing? Does it have any form of decking or cabin?
    Secondly, which assessment option is the basis of your comment?
    Thirdly, are you using the 2013 edition of the standard or the 2002 version? It makes a difference!
    In the opinion of the ISO Working Group it is impractical to make a capsize recovery test compulsory for ALL Category C and D boats, but this test is used for certain assessment options.
    Given the data above I will respond in more detail.
    Convenor 12217
     
  12. Claus Riepe
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 70
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 9
    Location: Germany

    Claus Riepe Junior Member

    Convenor,
    I refer to the 2002 version of ISO 12217 -3, and -2. To be honest, until today I did not know about the 2013 version, nor did I work it through. But what I have seen of the 2013 version does not make a real difference with regards to my case.: Builders of small sailing boats still can opt out from practical capsize recovery testing. This must change.

    The boat which perished was an undecked sailing boat of 19 ft.LOA, also fitted for rowing and motoring, conceived in the seventies. Very popular, thousands sold. With the advent of RCD the boat was not structurally redesigned for ISO, only former storage compartments were filled with in-situ foam to improve flotation. I suppose that did improve the swamped boat stability and crew carrying properties but I think that this at the same time completely ruined the previous capsize recovery ability.

    I do not know whether this boat was subsequently ever properly tested at all under any of the ISO options, as you know Categories D and C are merely self-declared by the manufacturer, and do not require a third party assessment and confirmation. BTW, there is not a single reference on the Internet that this boat has ever been subjected to an Option 7 capsize recovery test, nor to any other alternative test option.

    Anyway, you write that the ISO Working Group found it "impractical" to make the capsize recovery test compulsory for ALL C and D sailing boats.
    I do not agree. I think at the very least all open sailing boats must be subjected to the practical capsize recovery testing of Option 7.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2014
  13. Richard Woods
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 2,197
    Likes: 149, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1244
    Location: UK, USA and Canada

    Richard Woods Woods Designs

    It is always sad and depressing when people die on boats, or cars or planes.

    But I note that the boat was designed in the 1970's and that thousands were sold. Is this the first fatality with this boat, or does it have a very bad record?

    I believe the owners manual should include an explanation of the righting method? If so then at least one boat should have been capsized and re-righted by the crew alone

    What were the circumstances of the capsize? was it in Cat C or D conditions, or in worse weather?

    Richard Woods
     
  14. Claus Riepe
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 70
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 9
    Location: Germany

    Claus Riepe Junior Member

    Richard,
    this thread is about ISO 12217, and I do not want it go off topic discussing this particular accident, weather conditions and what the crew may or may not have done wrong. As this was a fatal accident, there is a public investigation under way, and sooner or later the official findings will be made public.

    No, I mentioned this case to highlight that IMHO ISO 12217-3 is potentially dangerous. This standard stipulates that boats must be very stable and buoyant when swamped, but thus inherently also causes inverted boats to be very stable in that position, rendering uprighting attempts by the crew fruitless. And at the same time, the standard does not force the builder or manufacturer to carry out any practical capsize recovery testing prior to marking their boats "D" or "C". I find that idiotic and outright dangerous. In view of actual cases, 12217 must be critically reviewed and amended, especially for smaller sailing and sail & oar boats.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2014

  15. Alik
    Joined: Jul 2003
    Posts: 2,773
    Likes: 163, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 1306
    Location: Thailand

    Alik Senior Member

    Claus, regarding capsize recovery test, I think any 6m dinghy is almost impossible to recover by crew of 2-3. Recovery of 5.5m cat would need a 'ship' to assist!

    There are tick as fixing the balloons and other 'sex toys' on mast top, but once removed by the crew it will create the same problem. I believe that boats used for children should pass this recovery test; other boats should have it as option only. Absolute safety is not possible!
     
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.