SCALING in Boat Design and why the twin towers fell down so easily

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by tom kane, Mar 25, 2007.

  1. messabout
    Joined: Jan 2006
    Posts: 3,138
    Likes: 303, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1279
    Location: Lakeland Fl USA

    messabout Senior Member

    Spectacular picture Kacchi22I. No doubt done with a tilt film plane vue camera. Focus at top nearly as good as at bottom. Your point is well taken. The "mine is bigger than yours" syndrome is rampant in America. Cars, boats, and anatomical features. We can take heart because Airbus has finally trumped our bigger is better thing.
     
  2. kach22i
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 2,414
    Likes: 111, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1222
    Location: Michigan

    kach22i Architect

    Wait until Boeing comes out with a huge flying wing..........you will see, America is No. 1!!!!!!!!:D

    Details like the leaf imprints in the towers base are wonderful.

    Eiffel tower base
    http://www.clt.astate.edu/wallen/digits/eiffel/default.htm
    [​IMG]
     
  3. charmc
    Joined: Jan 2007
    Posts: 2,391
    Likes: 78, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 840
    Location: FL, USA

    charmc Senior Member

    The answer there is crew cost. The same reason the Air Force uses jumbo transports, cruise ships are pushing 250,000 tons, and bulk carriers go huge. Especially in the smaller, all volunteer force, trained man/womanpower is costly, so there is a need for largest possible carrying capacity per vehicle, within the constraints of its operating environment. Note: "largest possible carrying capacity" does not necessarily equate to "most efficient".
     
  4. charmc
    Joined: Jan 2007
    Posts: 2,391
    Likes: 78, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 840
    Location: FL, USA

    charmc Senior Member

    Your point is definitely valid, BWD. Ultralarge size (2-3 times bigger than previous builds of the same type, for example) requires, actually demands, exceptionally creative thought to identify potential problem areas so engineering methodology can analyze and test for measurable effects and design solutions. Failure to imagine all the possible scenarios is what usually leads to accidents from previously unknown causes. Early in the jumbo jet era there were a series of accidents in which small planes crashed on takeoff. Eventually the cause was determined to be powerful vortices coming off the wingtips of the jumbos. They were both much more powerful and much more persistant than anyone had imagined. In the 1980's there was an incident in which a VLCC cracked its hull while being loaded at pierside; that was due to failure to watch loading patterns closely, but the mate had seen deviations in loading without problems in his previous and smaller ships; didn't think the loading plan was critical..... but it was because the new ship was larger, creating larger stresses. So close adherence to procedures was even more critical, precisely because of the larger size.
     

  5. charmc
    Joined: Jan 2007
    Posts: 2,391
    Likes: 78, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 840
    Location: FL, USA

    charmc Senior Member

    And Airbus is finding out the difficulties of designing and building the biggest thing. Meanwhile, for a change, Boeing is focusing on building a not so biggest plane, but making it more efficient to operate..... what a concept!! :p
     
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.