scale model of prospective build

It is so obvious that it seems incredible that has to be repeated again and again. And what is good for large ships, why not try to apply it to small boats?
But you know what the worst part, Rwatson? : someone will still say you have no reason.

 

Anyone who aspires to create or make anything should learn 3d modeling. I think that art should still be compulsory subject at least until high school and that a basic understanding of 3d software be a part of the curriculum.

 

My daughter said that everyone should learn to dance, and states where preparing to force empolyeers to provide dance for corporate empolyees.

To each his own. But making your own favorite subject a universal requirement is a waste of time and peoples individuality.

I just had an idea for a small part done in 3d, illustrated as a series of 2d views and no one in one area of the aerospace company could understand what I was talking about.

We made a 3d plastic "printed" model and now after 3 months I finally get the go ahead.
All because they could not understand either 3d models or drawings.

There is a time and place for each.
And strong virtues for 3d modeling.
Just try for some tolerance and quit forcing it on everyone and every situation.

Do you remember that lots of boats have been built without 3d modeling?

 

I am not an educated man myself, but I do believe that education should be compulsory and state funded. I don`t think this makes me “intolerant”. What subjects are mandatory is of course up to debate. ”Dance” was a subject in almost every education system until relativity recently, so although your daughters opinion is not shared by those who deem what is taught today ,she certainly would have had support for her view by the founders of western culture and education ,the classical Greeks.

I would simply argue that the ability to use a 3d program as an aid for conceptualization, is a skill that anyone can benefit from. I think it would best be taught in an art class, and in the spirit of a renaissance education I think that art, although no longer fashionable, should be part of the curriculum at least in the lower grades.

Even management people could benefit from the knowledge of how important 3d programs are. Air bus recently lost billions of dollars because management failed to recognize the incompatibility of the old version of Catia with the new version. As a result parts made at different facilities failed to fit.

It is true that boats as well as everything else were designed without Cad in the past. Do you think that this will be true in the future?

 

Timothy,

I think that Cad is not a majic potient which will automatically make better boats. I have seen people who don't do well on 2d drawings really screw up when they tried to use 3d, because they did not have the basic understanding of what they were modeling. It happens all the time.

I doubt the Airbus story is the primary cause of their problem, because we have been using Catia V4 on the same program as Catia V5 and have not had the same problem.

There was one program where a company designed a major piece of structure and quoted the weight in kg when the actual weight was in #. Some major crisis work was done when the severe weight increase was recognized. Not a cad problem at all.

Education is good, I hope everyone gets as much as they can handle.
Competency is better.

I have known management who say flat out that if they we able to do 3d modeling they are not doing their job. Its the wrong skill which takes up time and valuable focus, for them.

We live in a sea of electronics. So should we all be able to fix our Ipads when they go bust? How about fixing the toilet? Or the car?
Pick anyone's specialty and see if we should all focus on that.

I personally hope we have some people who want to be farmers, and not CAD drivers.

 

Hi !
The ship design process happens in a few steps. When you are bidding for a new project, you do what is called a forward design, which is basically conceptual and the extent may vary from a simple general arrangement plan to a fairly detail one with cfd and fea.
The next phase would be the basic design - where all hydrodynamic parameters/hull forms are frozen. System drawing for various mechanical systems are made, propeller is designed, basic structural drawings ( for approval of class) are completed.
Next comes the functional/production design. At this stage all details are worked out to the level that it is ready for production. Whereas in a small shipyard this will mean a series of drawings in 2d format , large shipyards/design houses would create a virtual 3d model . its a horrendously costly affair - considering the price of the software ( like Aveva Marine or Cadmatic etc) , and the cost of manpower. At this stage, one can scrutinize the design for avoiding any clashes that may occur - in a much better way that 2d.
The major outcome of this part of the design would be to produce the nesting plans for hull and pipespools.
Once the ship is made, the fourth phase is as built design - to incorporate all changes that may have occurred during building.
As a fresh naval architect, I did a lot of mock ups for naval ships and then did a lot of 3d virtual model - the first one luckily being the soft version of my first ship .

 

Now I understand.

Thank you!

PS:

RWatson, you have no reason!

Wait! Someone was twisting my arm.



I think time with a 3d image, and then more time with a reasonable scale model, hopefully the model is large enough to use some of the same material .... it is a shame when a model doesn't help you with the final build process.

 

I wonder how many that are advocating a learning virtual modeling have actually built a boat. I'll bet the vast majority of those suggesting it's a great tool for this single yacht build actually haven't any real boat building time. I'm not talking about walking around a shop where others are building something you might have had a hand in designing, but to have actually have built a yacht themselves. I see this frequently, more and more, with learned and skilled computer operators/yacht designers, that don't know which end of a surface planer, to feed the plank into and why this might just be an important thing to know. This is the reason some can't see past their own skill set. I can model and build and there is a very distinct difference, between a design drawn up by a person with building experience, and one that's drawn by someone that just knows how to model. How much you want to bet, the model maker's product will be full of imposable to build or service elements, yet the builder that happens to know modeling will make it possible, to remove a tank or engine with having to pull the whole pilothouse, off the boat first.

 

PAR, will not waste my time to answer you.
If someone wants to refute your opinions and downs, I'd appreciate it. Seem more objective than if I do it
Cheers

 

How many yachts have you physically built TANSL? Pretty pictures on your former web site aren't indicative of anything other then modeling skill. How many times have you had to cut an access way or notch or other "off plan" compensation, because a plan didn't have it or consider it or it was just needed to make something work in reality, rather than on the screen? You ask any builder how many times this occurs during just a single build and it becomes pretty obvious, pretty fast. Conversely, ask any professional, working in a yard, how many times they had to go back to their model and make an accommodation for something or another. The problems that occur in a complex design occur regardless of the method used to generate the plans. 3D modeling has cut down on errors, but it's also driven up costs and complication.

A 3D model is almost a necessity in ship building, but not in small craft. Does it make small craft easier to build - maybe, depends on the model, but even the most skilled usually have to whittle it down and refine it once the project gets underway. This is precisely the same thing as what occurs on paper plans, regardless of the way it's applied to the paper.

You see, I'm off the opinion that you just don't have any actual building experience, just computer time, at least with yachts, so you can't understand the process.

So, how many yachts have you personally hung a garboard on? How many transom cutouts have you hacked into boat butts? How many cabin cruisers have you converted into runabouts?

 

PAR, will not waste my time to answer you.
If someone wants to refute your opinions and downs, I'd appreciate it. Seem more objective than if I do it.
Just want to point out one thing. The many ships that you have built not let you guess what my knowledge and my experience. Let imitating thy way, I also do a seer: I am and I have always been able to work without a person like you by my side. You, on occasion, need to work with a NA to you.
Cheers

 

Obviously a translation issue going on there. So, how many yachts have you built?

 

I agree completely with you.

 

A nice message exchange

Dear friend , maybe we're both mistaken in judging the contrary. I am not a boat builder and therefore have not built any boat but there are over 200 boats sailing that have been built with projects signed by me.

As for the 3D modeling , I had no choice but to learn to handle myself with these techniques to not have to rely on cartoonists. But above all , I learned these techniques due to the other facet of my job : software developer for naval architects. I think that modeling is not one of my best skills and, in any event, is not what I'm most proud .

I am retired and therefore I have forbidden to work on important projects. I only know of a potential client of mine who told me that he had chosen you and I he understood perfectly his choice, and so told to him. I have no evidence that you have removed any clients to me. I think you are wrong again. It is true that I have made several offers and I have not been answered . Therefore do not hate you for that.

Quite frankly , some of the statements from the technical point of view, you do seem to me very wrong and I express my opinion against.

With all due respect and consideration , receive my cordial greetings .

Ignacio López (TANSL)

 

The most vehement anti-technology people are always the ones that haven't acquired the skills.

The nexus between 3d design, and physically building a boat is like saying the winemaker has to physically stomp the grapes.

Also, blaming design mistakes on the CAD software, is like saying car accidents are always the cars fault - nothing to do with the operator at all.

There are some skills that are becoming very much a new standard.

400 years ago, reading and writing were a luxury.

Today, Timothys comments about 3d CAD being a basic skill is right on the money, and with free Sketchup (for example), totally practical.

Congratulations on your diplomacy Tansl - there are times you can be right without having to waste energy on converting the uninformed.