Final blueprints

I couldn't find if there was anyone supposed to draw a final blueprint. Will there be a complete set of lines and specifications?

 

Gonzo, I'd be happy to the drawing. Once I'm up to speed on me CAD work, I'll almost certainly give it a shot - you can all sharpen your bricks and get ready for the hurling.... The lack of interest shown (until now ) has just slowed it all up....

 

These are the lines posted so far. There's still a great deal of refining to do, but it's a start....

 

Could we get more flare forward?

 

We can get whatever you want
This more to your liking? (Original lines are on the right)

 

UN-WELCOME 2 CENTS

I HAVE NOT PARTICIPATED IN SO LONG I REALLY HAVE NO GROUNDS TO SPEAK ON THIS BUT HERE IS MY UN-EDUCATED OBSERVATION. i THINK i WOULD LOWER THE CHINE FLAT DOWN A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE WATERLINE IN THE FORWARD SECTION THIS WILL ADD A LITTLE MORE LIFT SOONER BUT STILL ACT AS A SPRAY RAIL. THIS WILL COMPROMISE THE FINE ENTRY BUT THE EXTRA BOYANCY AND ROOM FORWARD WOULD HELP TOO!.
WILL: YOU CAN TELL ME TO STUFF IT! I WON;T BE HURT!!
YOU DO GREAT WORK, JUST MY OPINION.
8KNOTS

 

8 - nobody's participated in the thread for ages (me included) so you have as much right as anybody else to contribute. Besides - it's not a job here - we should be free to come and go as we please...
Now as to your suggestion - it's really up to the group, but for my 3 cents (the Aussie $ isn't as strong as the greenback ) I think that even though the finer entry will reduce the space available for accomodation, there is only likely to be a v-berth up here, so for a smoother ride it is an acceptable trade-off....
Thoughts?

 

I meant flare on the sides. Concave sectiond forward direct the spray away. Sometimes though, it seems to make the spray go up and then down with force into the back of your neck. I think the chine you drew will throw spray down too. It has a nice sweep.

 

The hull sides in my model - & lets remember its only my suggestion, it's for the group to decide how everything should be done - anyway, I made the model so that the hull sides are made from two panels (upper and lower) to keep construction more simple (all of the boat is developable). As you suggested, I tried to align them so that the sides were convex (flared) but wound up with a very peculiar looking boat (I think as a result of the way I modelled it). Then I tried the convex shape - it will increase interior space and hopefully should be reasonably dry too. It give a bit more shape than a single panel would, but is much easier to produce than strip planking would be....I think....
Do you like the 'new' shape better? (sections on the left) - and what about 8's suggestion about dropping the chine a bit...?

 

I think a lower chine would help at lower speeds. What was the target speed? Flat panels limit the choice of shapes. It looks pretty good though. Lines make the discussion easier.

 

Will:
What software are you running? I like the looks of it. You are in module 3 of westlawn aren't you now. Just wondering if you are learning the software for your own fun or if you need it for your studys at W.
8Knots

 

Will,

Been a while since we played with this. I will hazard a comment on the drawing. The sections show an increasing waterline beam all the way to the transom. That and the sharp entry will guarantee some exciting runs downwind in waves.

The chine angle of attack in the aft sections is interesting since I have been using a similar design for some time and it works well at inducing early planing and preventing squating of the stern. However, this will also make the situation mentioned above worse, especially if you still plan on running fast where the chine will act like a fixed tab and drive the bow down.

Gotta see if I can get myself unguested on the forum.

Tom Lathrop

 

8 - the software is a very old version of Multisurf LT (the 'light' version). I was lucky enough to be able to borrow an (equally old) laptop with the program installed. I like the way the program operates - unfortunatley I could never afford to update to the current, full blown version.
As far as it relates to Westlawn (I'm posting off the final lesson in module 2 today) there's no doubt that you can complete the entire course using manual drafting. Many of the calculations and design alterations will take longer, and if you're planning in going into the design industry, then getting into CAD at an early stage in the course would be to your advantage. However, if all you ever want is to be able to complete that (rather lovely) LRC of yours, then I can't see why you'd need CAD at all.

Tom - I too hope you can get "un-guested" as I always look for your posts....
I think it's probably a function of the image size that makes the beam appear to increase all the way aft. In fact it remains constant for about the aft 1/3. I did it that way only to maximise the volume available for accomodation - but you are quite correct in suggesting that it might be better if it was slightly narrower at the transom - I'll add it to the list of fixes. I'll drop the chine a little too, post the updated images and see what you all think....

 

Ok, slightly lowered chine up fwd, narrower towards transom (also sheer narrowed a little towards trnsm).....

 

also an enlarged view of the stations.
One concern I do have is that the at-rest waterline (in cyan above) is very narrow fwd. I reckon it'd be a bit tippy at rest...?