Transverse frame calculation

This is called tumblehome or flare, if up fwd. Almost all boats have this ‘geometric’ feature.

Sorry, no. See above for clarification again.

The longitudinal stiffeners’ prevent the plate and the welds in the longitudinal direction (seams) from taking up their own unstressed natural extension/shape. Having the longitudinal stiffeners welded to the plate before the plate is fully welded, is still restraint. The localised stiffness of the longitudinal that is now welded is significantly greater than that of just the plate butt weld, ergo it provides restraint on the seam (butt) weld from taking up any natural extension or contraction upon cooling

The cheap bad practice way of getting around this, is by those that place the weld seam in the centre of the plate, ie between longitudinals. But all that does is have the welded joint, with all its potential flaws and stress concentrations in the centre of plate with no support. Being in the centre of the panel, what happens when in a sea way, the plate and therefore the seam, flexes under load.
Flexing = Fatigue!

Which is why there is a maximum distance that a weld seam is allowed, in Class rules, from a longitudinal stiffener (or frame). The long.t provides stiffness to the welded joint and prevents or minimises the effects of flexing/fatigue. See post #190, again.
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/cl...se-frame-calculation-32584-13.html#post371243

 

The quote was taken directly from your own posting.
Again: Please tell me where I have lied. Calling someone a liar is a serious thing, so you'd better back it up with some facts.

Yes it is - there's nothing complicated about it, and it is not that difficult to design a bottom structure that can withstand it without any damage - minimal or not.

If it was designed to withstand it, it probably would. But you're comparing apples and pears here - the rest of us are comparing origami boats with steel yachts, designed and built with proper framing.

 

Wynand Noortje, sure one of our best experts in metal boat building, once summed it up very nice and on the spot:

Regards
Richard

 

Hope the above answers your questions. I accidentally posted it in the middle of the quote and didn't want to write it all over again

 

When some one is promoting ******** which will cost cruisers a fortune in time and money, possibly curtail their cruising dreams for years, and possibly scuttle their ability to get out in their lifetime, you can be sure I will speak up, in their defense.
Much of the "Be Reasonable and do it the hard way" being promoted is just another way of saying "Pay me to take as long as I possibly can make the job last, for maximun profit in my pocket " I saw a guy screwed this past winter by such a con artist. He is still paying the guy to finish what was really a couple of weeks worth of work.
I'm sure Wynand is paid by the hour, the more hours the more pay and the more he can justify charging for a boat. Simplifying boatbuilding represents a major financial threat to guys like him. That is the main motivation to extremely defensive reactions to origami metal boatbuilding.
The guys with the bondo also feel their livlihood threatened, by hulls which need no fillers.
I've helped dozens of cruisers get free in strong, fair, extremely seaworthy steel hulls, with minimum time expense and effort, which they could have never afforded doing it the old fashioned way. Does that make me feel guilty ,for not maintaining cruising as an elitists sport. Not a chance!

 

Sure Brent,

Wynand is a nasty ******* who cheated all his clients over all the years, and well known designers like Dudley Dix and van de Stadt assisted him......?

But you are the honest guy, you always tell the truth.....
Like, one can scale the method, you defend on your crusade, up to 60ft and still save a hughe amount of money compared with other methods....right?

That is either a massive scam, and a dangerous one on top of that, or you really have lost all your marbles.

Don´t you think that all of these "proven idiots", like Dix, v.d.Stadt, Dijkstraa, Frers, to name just a few, would be long, long out of business when your assumption / insinuation would be just even close to reality?

Are, Royal van Lent, Abeking & Rasmussen, Palmer Johnson, van Dam, etc. all cheating their clients? All idiots?

Get your feet back on the ground Brent, stay in your niche where your contribution may have some value (i don´t doubt that).
Play in your class and let the pro´s play in their classes.

Regards
Richard

 

No it doesn't! I don't see anything special about the described grounding. If you're sailing at hull speed, then you're probably sailing more or less straight ahead when hitting the rock.

Of course, if you want to calculate all the dynamics involved in a grounding like this to arrive at a suitable structure, then it would become quite complicated. But why bother? Simplified calculations will do quite OK.

All you need to know is the boats displacement, its hull speed and the geometry of the keel and bottom structure. Estimate a reasonable deceleration time and you're almost there!

Simple? Yes! I guess even you could have done it back in '84, but for some reason you didn't. The twin keels being in the middle of the plate shouldn't complicate things. And the framing above the keel (the floors), not the keel attachment, plays the most important role in the boats ability to withstand a grounding without damage.

Liar? Not me!

 

Do you honestly believe the stuff you are saying here? If so I can tell you have never run a business with employees, overhead or regulations. You have the low quality employee mentality.

 

Those whom disagree with the "guru of origami" are liars, lack intelligence, are protecting their own wallets. Such is the opinion of the "snake-oil salesman" of boatbuilding. Rather than offer up calculations which might prove these boats to be the panacea that they are not, Brent challenges the validity of calculations. Rather than accept advice which is the product of much proven experience in boat & shipbuilding, uneducated protests are made. Most of the "several of my boats..." posts are later shown to be one specific boat in one specific encounter. Most of the boats which Brent claims to have built were built by others. The search for scrap and the placement of the ridiculous number of firring tabs will use up more time than the construction & placement of transverse frames, so it(time) balances out. The lack of accurate calculations means that no two boats are identical in shape, displacement, stability. Probably the most common question asked on the origamiboats site is, "how did you...", a very clear indication that there is not a lot of meat in Brent's plans, past the steelwork stage. The cost to build a "Brentboat" is only less than building a boat of traditional design when one uses scrap/used equipment, still, no consideration is given to materials' fatigue life. The first-time builder should be cognizant of the fact that they will not finish a Swain boat any faster than a traditionally built boat and that the finished product will be lacking, in many areas.

As, by my understanding, Wynand has retired from boatbuilding, I would suggest that he has nothing to gain when offering his valued opinion. If only for the quality of fabrication, professionals will never be out of work, when common sense prevails. To belittle the well-known designers of steel sailboats shows such an insecurity over one's own designs that it is laughable. The disparity between designs based on knowledge & those based on a whim, is huge. All of the anecdotal evidence offered does not fill this gap. It is only more snake oil. Brent's motivation to shoot the messenger does nothing to detract from that message.

 

.....fellas, Brent does not live, nor does he wish to live in the "real" world.......his world has been good for him and his followers for many years now, even allows him to go sailing most of his life as i am sure we have all read of so often........his world is neither right nor wrong, it is his world.

...we can only advise other followers to do a little bit of homework to see why framing may/may not be needed...small origami type builds are quite sound if constructed to basic weld standards....he really only does make small boats anyhow, so let him live in peace...he honestly believes in his princilpes, as they are so often repeated.

It is a pity though that true steel boat builders are being falsly accused of ripping people off when all they do is an honest days work for a fair price doing what they do best.....

 

I agree with you entirely. But if life is so good for him, why been so dismissive of the other methods, to the point of insulting all naval architect who make a living of their trade, why preaching if you are happy, why be in rage against other materials to the point of misinformation and ignorance, why been so prosecutorial on anybody who ask a question? Why?
He is not happy, he is not convinced of what he does. Believes? I am not so sure. Here lies the problem.
If he was he will be more friendly, and certainly a good camrade, and I will go sailing with him as a cook. (I am a the very best ship cook).
He take the forum in hate. We leave him in peace, but not when he attacks recklessly things he doesn't know.
Talking about steel construction is simply impossible now. he highjack all thread on the subject with an axe to grind. It make the thread boring.
I would like to talk steel construction, or even wood or aluminum construction, but it is impossible with him around. It is sad because he can participate and share his experiences. But no, he is preaching and treating everybody like *****. Not my taste of dialogue.
I don't like my trade been insulted, and my fellow boatbuilder and naval architect and designer insulted by a very frustrated man.
I think as a whole we are more honnest. Certainly toward our customer. No doubt about that.
Brent can be a great addition, but the arrogant attitude is not what we expect from a boatbuilder, and a sailor.
Daniel

 

Brent Swain Origami boat

Brent Swain Origami boat

Brent Swain

You derive your entire income from this cottage industry so it comes as no surprise that you cling to your published viewpoint unchanging even when shown that you are dangerously ignorant.

Looking at only a few points:

You were proven to be quite wrong on the incorrect arch analogy applied to the curved longitudinals. What don't you understand about this?

You've been shown to be very creative from the economic perspective. Since it appears to be more about your economics since the target client would always be better off with a good well built used boat.

You have been told that there are no, as you put it "phenomenally strong conic sections present". You cannot actually show where this is on a lines drawing or even a photo of the hull

You misunderstand the amount of strength that curvature provides, and again are unable to provide an actual factual applied factor for any part of your design. Just wild generalisations which are always wrong.

What is particularly concerning is when you claim that the non existent "magical" properties you infer in your design allow it to be scaled up in size with no thought to required transverse framing. Or robust construction detailing.

It inspires people who don't know better to embark on projects that will let them down both financially and from a hull strength. safety perspective.

To then imply that professional concern about your claims is derived solely from a pecuniary interest is just creative spin trying to put the boot on the other foot.

It is clear that even your 36 foot hulls will buckle in the forward section much more easily than a similar boat with transverse framing or a fwd bulkhead. We can prove that easily.

Your wooden boat analogy for current framing practice is a farce and you can't even supply one example of from current class rules ( eg GL or ISO would be good starters)

Your main arguments are simply statistical observations which can never replace the vessel failures observed over the years by the class societies. To claim that both professionals and class societies are corrupt, and set high standards of design and construction simply to line the pockets of boat-builders is morally wrong, even morally corrupt.

Having seen your "plans" I'm not that keen on your 36 footer either. There are some very poor structural details fatigue inducers and generally unnecessary weakness evident in the design. It could be considerably improved for little extra material cost or construction time. I'd urge anyone considering building on of these boats to consider some substantial modification of the framing method. It's frankly very poor.

 

This is probably the most disgusting post I read.
It make me sick. Even Woosh didn't went so low. And he was hard to beat.
But it's done now. We are at the sewer level thanks to Brent.
Even you customer, who spend some half a million of dollars, will be in disgusted by your post.
You defend your amoral intellect, not your customers.
To redeem yourself, publish your Canadian income tax return, so we will see how you defend the poor sailors.
Ho I forget, you sail the Pacific to avoid taxes. Interesting.
Post your books for every customer you had, and your expenses for every boat you built, post you living expenses.
You taulk money, insulting other who make an honnest living, so show us the true colors of your business.
Not with words, with fact.
Daniel

 

I've never been critical of Van de Stadt, as he is one of the few designers of small steel boats who has been really innovative in taking advantage of the properties of steel, and passing the benefits on to his clients. Again you lie.
He didn't take it as far as I have , possibly because he had to put off further advancement, to appease the luddites as to what would be accepted, in an extremely slow moving tradition.
The reason more designers have not dared to take advantage of the properites of steel is because the "Be reasonable and do it the hard way "philosophy has such a stranglehold on the upper income part of the market. I prefer to work with priactical people on the lower income end of the market, people who don't mind getting their hands dirty . They greatly outnumber those in the upper end of the income scale , who would ratther use disinformation to doscourage the poor out of the crusing lifestyle.
Every torture test my boats have endured , every 8 ft wave they have fallen off onto hard coral or hard sand , every collision with a hard object at hull speed, without any of the damage your calculations predict, have proven your calculations dead wrong, over and over again, for the last 30 years, yet you claim that your predictiions are more valid than the real world experiences they have endured. Time you left your pocket calcultors for some experience in the real world.

This morning I woke up in a peaceful lagoon surrounded by a park . I didn't wake up to an alarm colck. I haven't owned one of those in years. No, I woke up when I damned well felt like it. A guy's gotta be totally insane to live like this. As I laid in bed ,I turned on the traffic report to see how the "Sane , Normal" people live . I sure wish I had their space in the traffic line up. I've never owned a car. Man what am I missing?Miss inhaling that sweet smog.
I took an extra half hour before getting up, then I puttered around the boat til noon, before heading up to the library for the internet. Later I'll go down to the lake for a swim, a lake like a tropical lagoon, with a white sand beach, only containing the sweetest drinking water anywhere.
Only a complete lunatic would live like this.
After a swim and a lie on the beach. I'll probably head back to the boat for supper , venison steak washed down with some local thimble berry tea ,picked fresh. I've been living like this 11 months a year, since my mid 20's.
Man how insane can one get, choosing this totaly loonie lifestyle over the more 'Sane " and Normal " lifestyle.
If you don't want to end up living like this, and want to remain 'Normal" and "Sane,. and dont want to lose your spot in the traffic lineup, then you'd better get all your advice from the Normal" and" Sane " people, who have spent their lives on the treadmill in that traffic lineup.
Otherwise , you may end up like me, living a totally insane lifestyle.

As I pointed out in my book, you can judge the value of advice, by taking a critical look at what it has done for the person offering it.
Most of my clients who have spent a lot of money on a fancy interior , incuding several doctors , have come back after several years of offshore cruising experience saying "Never again. Painted plywood next time."
Anyone considering spending a lot on an expensive interior and all new material, should take alook a t Bob Griffeths book "Blue Water" or Moitesiers books " The Long way" and "Cape Horn the Logical route, " for example on how little they can get by with. Those are not inexperienced cruisers on an unlimited budget, doing their calculations in a padded chair in an office somewhere.
People who run boatyards with large staff have to maximise the money flowing in. They find econiomic liability in simplifying things, and when there is nothing going on the next customer has to pay for the retnt while the shop was empty.
Working with the owner in his own space has left me free of such problems. Naturaly that pisses of those who are on the environmentally destructive consumer treadmill, your personal environmental foot print being defined by how much money you go thru.
Don't envy, emulate!

 

Wow! Got to say Brent is taking more beating than any origami boat could ever handle.. but bet he's got all the framing missing from the boats