Yacht Design School?

Taken from here:
http://www.westlawn.edu/who/faq.asp

Universiy diploma clearly says 'naval architecture'. What is written in diploma of Westlawn, etc.?

 

I don't know, I'm like you in that regard. They suggested Yacht Designer as the catagory. One had an associate status with SNAME, as in "you get the coffee".

I certainly agree that more public trust and the full force of a university degree is indicated when designing major components of infrasturcture like garbage barges and BP oil rigs.

 

Would it not be just as valid to note that the only thing that all these succesful designers have in common is that they were students of Westlawn?
To only recognise that many have taken on additional studies to their Westlawn education, and not to acknowledge that the opposite is also true, verges on educational snobbery.
Westalwn is not the be-all and end-all of yacht design education. Nor are any of the other courses on offer. As a Westlawn grad, would I consider myself qualified to "to move laterally into different industries"? Probably not, depending on the industry sector concerned. Just as a doctor is not qualified to perform surgery.... But for those interested in small-craft design, Westalwn offers a good basis for a career in yacht design. It should not be considered the end of one's education... professional development is an essential element to the success of anyone's education.... hence the number of alumni who have gone on to do additional, specialsed courses.

 

I have experience of working closely with Westlawn alumni, on some projects. The first guy had good drawing skills and understanding of boats, but did not know how to calculate moment of inertia of rectangle (actually all engineers remember this simple formula used in structural calculations). So now we hire only people with Bachelor degree for engineering positions.

Later, I sent some of my staff to get Westlawn course in boat interiors design; since then Westlawn books are always on table as one of primary reference sources! BUT in this case Westlawn course was addition to Bachelor degree in interior design and to some other courses like 3DMax. All together it is excellent combination. Should their work be referenced as Westlawn alumni success? I am sure it can be, but not without mention of other courses as well

 

Absolutely agree with you Alik... that goes exactly to the point I was making.... that one shouldn't consider qualification from any given institution as
a) the be-all and end-all of education, and
b) that one's education should be an ongoing process - with qualification just one step in that process

 

Yes I also agree with both of you. I wasn't trying to say that any portion of their education was more important than any other portion.

I also wasn't trying to discredit Westlawn. As I said I think it sounds like a great program that does cover lots of aspects of boat design that aren't covered by naval architecture programs.

 

So it is safe to say that a Bachelor's degree from an accredited university along with courses taken at Westlawn can set up for a potentially strong resume to enter into the industry for entry-level positions?

 

I would agree with this.

 

Many of the comments about Westlawn Institute that have been made here are based on substantial ignorance of the program.

For instance, AIK says he had a Westlawn student work for him and he or she didn’t know how to find the moment of inertia of a rectangle. I can only conclude that this student hadn’t progressed very far in their studies, and that AIK has not taken the time to review the Westlawn Institute curriculum. Not only are Westlawn Institute students introduced to the concept of moment of inertia fairly early on in Module 2 (for mast and rigging calculations – which Westlawn teaches and most university programs do not), but complete structural design of fiberglass, aluminum, and wood boats is taught in Module 3. This includes properties of materials, determining loads and forces, and analyzing the beams and panels that take these loads on the hull, including determination of the required section modulus for acceptable stress, and determination of the required moment of inertia for acceptable deflection. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg for the structural-design subjects covered in Module 3.

There also seems to be an ill-informed assumption that Westlawn Institute’s program is somehow a quick-and-dirty education option. Nothing could be further from the case. For instance, Tom Fexas (one of the many, many illustrious Westlawn Institute grads) had already received his engineering degree before he took Westlawn. He still took four years to complete the Westlawn Institute program. He said, and I quote, “Westlawn was harder than my engineering degree.”

The Westlawn Institute curriculum is equal to about 69 college credits. This is equal to more than a full major. In fact, it’s not a bachelors program only because it does not include the gen ed (general education) courses in subjects like history and English that are required for a bachelor’s degree.

Indeed, the Westlawn Institute’s program has been credited towards a bachelors degree at New York Institute of Technology and at the Art Center for Design, and has been accepted toward a masters degree in ocean engineering at Stevens Institute Of Technology.

DavidJ comments that, “Westlawn sounds like a great idea and a really good program,” but then goes on to suggest that the successes of many of our alumni are because they already have other degrees. This is completely backwards. The question is why are so many individuals, who already have engineering degrees (and also degrees in naval architecture), enrolling in the very demanding Westlawn Institute program? The answer is, Westlawn Institute is one of the few places that teach this subject matter, and these individuals know that it’s the one of the best ways to advance in small-craft naval architecture.

More important in this regard, only about 20% to 30% of successful Westlawn Institute alumni have some sort of previous engineering degree. The rest have degrees in things like history, or English, or architecture, or no degree at all. They have had highly profitable and productive careers.

Tom Fexas—to continue using him as an example from very many—had his own exceptionally successful design firm. He could have hired engineers for his highly active practice. Instead, he largely employed Westlawn Institute alumni. As Fexas had an engineering degree and a Westlawn Institute diploma, he certainly knew both. You can draw your own conclusions about the reasons he elected to hire nearly half a dozen Westlawn Institute alumni, many without some other engineering degree.

Mention is made of a Westlawn Institute alumnus being at Farr. He was, and he did not have an engineering degree. After a few years at Farr, he moved on to form his own firm.

It is apparent that many of the inaccurate and ill-informed comments here are due to individuals who have a personal interest in finding imagined weaknesses in the Westlawn Institute program regardless of the facts and without really knowing the program. I won’t continue to respond to further questionable comments based on such substantial inaccuracies. The bottom line for any school—from a PhD program in nuclear physics to a welding trade school—is the success of its alumni. Ultimately, no other factor is more important, and no other factor better indicates the value of the education. This success is documented and available to all on the Westlawn Institute website. As I’ve said in previous posts:

Westlawn Institute has trained more practicing small-craft naval architects, who have had more boats built to their designs—yacht and commercial—than any other school in the world. These Westlawn alumni are professionals, whose record of achievement speaks for itself. Refer to:

Success stories:
http://216.119.80.31/who/success.asp

Testimonials:
http://www.westlawn.edu/who/testimonials.asp

Alumni Gallery:
http://www.westlawn.edu/Gallery/Gallery.asp

Dave Gerr
Director, Westlawn Institute of Marine Technology
www.westlawn.edu

 

Dave, that was very emotional post...

I would say that for any school level of knowledge is defined not by what is written in its books, but what remains in memory of alumni 3-5-10 years later, after study. I do not doubt that there is mention for moment if inertia in Westlawn materials, but in that particular case residual knowledge of alumni was a big disappointment; to tell the truth that designer was not doing structural calculations himself but subcontracted another engineer to do that On other side, any engineer who studied university course of strength of materials would remember such basic formulas for years...

 

Associate NA perhaps ?

I'm going to support Alik here. But I'm not running down Westlawn and I can understand why Dave Gerr is enthusiastic in his portrayal of Westlawn which certainly fills a niche and fills it quite well.

A Westlawn or YDS grad will learn more detailed specifics of rule based small craft design than it's possible to learn in most NA courses. But that doesn't mean a NA can't pick up that information easily. For example the concepts of planing vessels are not hard to grasp while the concept of designing the structure to cope with the loads from first principles is.

Most people completing an Engineering or NA degree will be capable of doing design to first principles and that includes analysis of structures with full knowledge of engineering basics.

Look at moment of inertia; a boat designer following rules needs to be able to calculate I (second moment of area) and Z (section modulus) but how do you relate that to a bending moment? How is a bending moment changed by end fixity? how do you calculate your extreme fiber stress from these numbers. Why is consideration of shear important. How do you use S-N curves and design for fatigue. The NA's and engineers reading this would consider it fundamental basics year one university level. Westlawn doesn't even start on that road past calculating (I) and (Z) .

If you are a boat designer you are provided with pre-consideration of these issues (and much more) in the rules you follow. But if I employ a university trained NA they know this as a fundamental basic. If I employed a westlawn grad designer I could not expect to give them that sort of work.

That's where I'd draw the line, and it's why some additional engineering study wouldn't hurt either before or after Westlawn.

I've read through the Westlawn material a few years ago and I thought it thorough enough in what it covered for applied knowledge, perhaps a little dated, but it's no where near as hard or as comprehensive as an Engineering/NA degree. It's a technical course not a theoretical based course and there's a big difference there.
From an engineering viewpoint I thought it could do with a good unit at least on fatigue, that alone would be worthwhile to a boat designer and it's not hard to grasp.

A very useful addition might be to offer a correspondence post grad diploma to Engineers and NA's.
I'd be interested to know if a NA corresponded with Westlawn how much of the course would they be exempted? The courses are quite different in content.

 

That's an excellent idea... Say, courses on 'Small craft types, architecture and styling', 'Small craft flotation and stability', 'Small craft performance' or 'Rules and regulations in small craft design' could be of great value for NA graduates; I am ready to contribute if someone is interested.

 

MikeJohns got the point.

There is group of subjects called 'General Engineering', studied by naval architects. It could vary depending on time and university, but when I did my studies, I got:

- geometry, engineering drawing, marine drafting, computer graphics - 4 semesters;
- materials (metals and non-metals, specifications, manufacturing processes) - 2 semesters;
- accuracy and standardisation in engineering - 1 semester;
- computers and programming (with bias to numerical methods) - 2 semesters;
- strength of materials - 2 semesters;
- theoretical mechanics - 3 semesters;
- machine design (machine parts, transmissions, etc.; we were required to design gearbox and winch) - 2 semesters;
- automations systems (still secret for me what it was) - 1 semester;
- industrial ecology - 1 semester
- civil protection (methods of engineering protection in case of emergency) - 1 semester
- labour protection and safety (noise, ventilation, fire safety, etc.) - 1 semester
- electrical engineering - 1 semester;
- hydroaerodynamics - 1 semester;
- economics and engineering economics - 3 semesters;
- engineering research methods - 1 semester;
- patenting - 1 semester;

This list does not include 'Natural sciences' like maths, physics, chemistry, etc. and 'Humanitarian sciences' (those are annoying) also studied by naval architects.

1 semester means at least 4 months of study; average about 1-2 lectures per week, at least 1 lab and 1 practice per week; some courses also required 'course design work'.

We also got 2 semesters of training at shipyard (1 day per week), training as shipwrights (men) or loft draughtsmen (women); this was summarized by 1 month of full-time practice and getting workers certificates.

And now I quote Dave:

I can not agree with that statement - I look at course program on their website and I do not see most of these general engineering basics. Of course, I am making conclusion based on brief from their website, but seems many parts are either missing, or rudimentary.

The question might be asked how often I use those knowledge in my daily practice? Answer is: on regular basis. Installation of frames on yard or processing sea trials results requires knowledge of measurements accuracy; design of custom door opening system for jet ski garage requires machine engineering, calculations of resistance of non-conventional object requires knowledge of hydrodynamics and programming, etc. Without all these knowledge naval architect (as head of marine professionals) is not able to control other staff like electrical and systems engineers, mechanical engineers, economists, etc.

 

Are the concepts of planing vessels really so simple to grasp? How long will it take someone to understand/design/predict exactly how a planing hull will interact with all the various sea conditions it will encounter at various speeds, angles, loading, etc. in a small boat? To know how the steps added for x-gain will affect not simply speed, planing, but how it will "feel" on a test drive when turning a tight curve at 40 knots - how much slip is perfect, how much is all wrong to the potential buyers? Is understanding how every curvature, pod, pad, projection, step, strake, etc. really simpler than the structure to support it on a small boat? What is it that makes a donzi sweet 16 a boat that people still want to run and care for after 40 years? Or aronow-designed offshore boats have "it" that makes them legendary and still collected? Or the creativity to come up with the concept package that made the strong market niche for boston whaler? Or the designer who came up with the RIB concept? Not discounting a full engineering background at all, but also I think it does take a bit of a spark of creativity / intuition / an overall understanding of every aspect of the small boat being designed to differentiate what will become the successful legendary boat from all the rest.

He said the only reason it's "not a bachelors program"; he didn't say the only reason it's not "a naval architecture/engineering degree." I don't discount the strengths you get from a naval architecture degree, but I don't think you should discount what westlawn focuses on either.

 

David does indeed speak very passionately in his post above; perhaps too much so. By that I mean too close to the “subject matter” at hand to be rational and objective....

This sounds more like a “business” model than an “educational” model with which one can aspire to, as a measurement of “success”. I disagree with this statement.

Since if the course is being hailed as so successful based upon its alumni, why is every graduate not so successful? Your implication is that the course is sufficient to be a success in the professional field, just look at the long list. But there is also another list, an even longer one…those who have not been as successful as Tom Fexas et al.

Thus, the quality of an institution is measured by the advances said institution has given to the field in question. If the subjects taught are simply regurgitated ad infinitum, there is neither advancement nor progress, just a revolving door of students. Some doing well some not.

For example, here are just 3 of the staff members at my last Uni:

http://www.soton.ac.uk/ses/people/staff/PriceWG.html

http://www.soton.ac.uk/ses/people/staff/ShenoiRA.html

http://www.soton.ac.uk/ses/people/staff/HudsonD.html

If you look at their research and publications, it gives you some idea of the quality of the staff and hence the continual advancement of the course from research.

Having successful students is always great and a good advert. But a single rose is not a summer.

I’m with Alik and MikeJohns on this.

Westlawn is a fine course, however, it is just a bridge between being a draughtsman and being a professional naval architect. Westlawn provides student information to allow them to hit the ground running in a DO. A uni student struggles to begin (generally owing to the lack of everyday design skills) but then progresses rapidly once aquired.

Since anyone can call themselves a yacht designer, no training required. There is even one poster on this site called Brent Swain who has “designed” yachts, but is clearly lacking in just about every academic discipline required to become a professional naval architect. I would not call that a role model. Thus sound engineering theory and principals are a prerequisite to provide the student with the tools to understand and explore anything with confidence.

There needs to be a distinction between being taught what a boat is, how to draw it and drawing within a set of prescriptive rules and learning where to put the bunks etc, and that of someone being able to design from a blank sheet of paper and design/engineer from scratch every aspect and being able to analysis and validate each procedure using theory before even getting to the drawing phase. Those that are from Westlawn that are able to do this are the exception rather than the rule (probably owing to their previous background in an engineering related discipline). The reverse is true of a university naval architecture course.

It would have been far better David if you responded with more factual evidence than a mere anecdote of Tom Faxes’ statement about “Westlawn was harder than my engineering degree.” How hard was his engineering degree and where did he do it?...are just the first questions of many that come to mind.

Any school or institution of learning can quote successful alumni in one shape or form. This does not mean it is a good course nor a bad course, just another course.

However, for example, given the choice to be taught hydrodynamics by Froude or by “some bloke” whose boat won a race which was well publicised…whom would you choose as your lecturer?

Those that prefer the “some bloke”…shall learn practical but somewhat myopic methods for designing. In the sense that all decisions made are weighted by commercial constraints. The designer is always constrained by cost, time and performance issues….as such ends up talking about these issues alone, as the path to 'success'.

Those that select Froude, shall be taught the entire spectrum of “what if’s”, not just one path that lead to one success. Hence providing you with the foundation to understand all aspects of hydrodynamics, devoid of any commercial constraints that clouds the judgement and becomes subjective when a “designer”.