Pros and cons of steel sailboats - Page 300 - SailNet Community
Old 12-30-2013
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hobart
Posts: 134
Thanks: 6
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 9

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Swain View Post
You claim that a batten out in the open ,attached to nothing behaves the same as a longitudinal welded and contained inside a steel hull, and you accuse me of failing to understand basic engineering principles ? I have explained the principles time and time again , but each time it goes right over your head. So I'll try one more time , not for Mike , ( he'll never get it) but for other readers. When you weld a longitudinal to a flat plate, then curve the plate, it puts the longitudinal under compression, the inside becoming shorter than the outside . No, increased outward pressure doesn't reduce the ability for it to resist inward pressure. When you put pressure on the hull, and longitudinal , from the outside, the only way it can give, is for the ends to move along the plate, to which it is welded. You have suggested that it bulges outwards, which would require small angle iron compressed on end, to stretch several feet of 3/16th plate at 11,250 lbs per linear inch tensile strength. The ends are fully supported by the plate they are welded to, and the curves, which they in turn maintain.. To do that, it would have to diagonally stretch 3/16h plate, with a tensile strength of 11, 250 lbs per linear inch, 3 ft of it in the topsides.
The other is for the longitudinals to buckle. With a weld every 4 inches which has more metal than the cross section of the longitudinal, you would have to bend it in 4 inch increments, in a span of 4 inches, supported by the ends, which continue to be supported by big welds a quarter way up the leg of the angle . You would also have to twist the 3/8th by 1 inch angles . So give us your estimate of what it would take to bend the inside flange of 3/8th by 1 inch angle in a 4 inch span, then the leg, 5/8th by 3/8th angle again in a 4 inch span, held to the plate by a weld halfway up the leg. Not by direct pressure, but by pressure at 90 degrees to the direction of the bend. Add to that the support of the rest of the angle, far beyond the bends.
Or perhaps you could explain how you get pressure on the end of an angle, to stretch 3/16th plate , 3 or more feet of it, at a tensile strength of 11,250 lbs per linear inch.
Span is the amount of curve it takes to support the angle ,which in turn supports the curve. It is not an angle standing alone, attached to nothing, which you imply, as I point out above.
I remember the Joshua style boats, which Moitessier, Patrick Van God, and others, proved beyond all reasonable doubt. They had only transverse frames, which looked like 2 inch by 1/4 inch flatbar frames, ..........................
Give a man enough rope !

What I indicated was that if your proposed revolutionary theory was valid then it’s applicable to a simple beam too. All I did was show you a comparison between two beams, one bent within it’s elastic limit as in your building method and one that was formed with no pre stress whatsoever.
Under load the beam with the ‘Brent pre stress arc’ was less able to withstand a point load. All you were supposed to take away from that is that your structural argument is a fallacy. It’s as valid for a beam section as it is for a hull structure when considering local panel loads.
The other situation which is far stronger is for the inner structure to be in tension rather than either neutral or compression. That is otherwise known as a ‘pre-tensioned’. That’s stronger again. Your method puts the pre-tensioned bit in pre compression, what that means is that it assists the arc in straightening out rather than resisting it. Your arguments are inside out, and simply wrong. You were claiming all over the place that it was a structural arch but that was also shown to be a complete fallacy.

So again your 36 footers are apparently strong enough but they dent easily and with large dents under relatively low level impacts than they should, so they are not tough in that regard. But for everyone’s sake, before you start promoting 60 foot versions of your boat, go ask anyone with a bit of real structural knowledge. Try and find anyone other than you that thinks this is a valid argument. Even load test a structure yourself.

Importantly and sounding like a broken record ….Your method doesn’t make your boats stronger, it makes them weaker than they could be and more prone to large denting from point load. For real strength the plate should become a diaphragm under load so that it is in tension and that takes adequate framing.
And again: You just don’t understand buckling at all it’s got nothing to do with tensile or compressive material properties nor the tripping of the stiffeners, it’s about ‘snap-through’ instability of the hull.

As for denting 5 or 6mm plate with either a sledge or a pick next to a frame you are deluded if you think you could put a hole in a hull with either. And as I said where are these properly framed boats that holed so easily? They are just in your imagination, it’s just not a valid observation.
I also said grillage can yield before the plate ruptures which is why Gringo didn’t have any holes in her plate. Gringo was also extensively transversely framed. And you use the Gringo example for your own ends at times so she is a good example of how transverse framing keeps the plate in place so it can take stress rather than simply buckling under a far lower load which takes far less energy and is far more catastrophic.

Now lets look at rotating keels into the hull once again. This is a significant issue, you know very well there were more boats built to your own design than the tall tale with an unnamed boat, unnamed owner, and variable location.
It shows that your presumed strength from curvature didn’t exist and that the supporting plate buckled easily in low speed collisions. It’s a good example of intuition being wrong, no different to your intuition that your design could scale frameless to 60 feet. When in reality anything much over 40 feet would be inadequate to meet any sensible offshore design head requirements, and would be significantly prone to grounding damage.

As for Lawyers telling you your designs are safe; lets presume for a minute that is true, and the Lawyer actually said that, (which I doubt with your record). What do you think that lawyer would say if you were the designer of a 60 foot design that just killed it’s crew and that expert professional witnesses were testifying that they had told you that your design was inadequate, and that your understanding of structures was abysmal ?

All the tall tales of incredible strength tend to ignore that fact that most of the boats involved were not built to your design but had more transverse framing. For example the NW passage boat you use for vindication had both thicker plate and extensive transverses not in your plans. In fact I’d suggest that most of the BS boats built have significantly more framing than shown in your plans.

Then you have the temerity to compare other designers plate first then frame construction method with your design and pretend it vindicates your design methodology. And now Joshua !

Bernard Moitessier’s “Joshua” that you mention had deep floors (transverses) and closely spaced transverse frames from the floor to the deck beam which were fully ‘fixed’ at both ends tied into floors and deck beams ( end fixity of 1 ). So you are way off likening Joshua to your designs or saying she had minimal framing she was a very strong design.

The fact is that you made dangerous assumptions in the presumed strength of your construction method. Those assumptions are wrong. I've asked you before and I'll never get an answer becsaue you simply don't know....What head of water do you think would collapse the fore-part of your 36 footer ? How about a 60 footer ? Why is this important? Do you know?

Your stability arguments are also hype, your small steel designs are on the tender side and the best estimate of AVS is closer to 135 degrees than the 180 you initially touted. That’s just a by product of using steel for small boats.

Last edited by MikeJohns; 12-30-2013 at 04:30 AM. Reason: Punctuation
MikeJohns is offline

Old 12-30-2013
grumpy old man

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,797
Thanks: 4
Thanked 167 Times in 158 Posts
Rep Power: 6

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Mike:
If you want to wade thru the Wolfenzee thread you can find Brent discussing a positive righting moment of 182 degrees. I think that's when I first realized that BS has a problem with numbers and the elements of yacht design. It was good for a chuckle though.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Bob's Blog ....

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Please also visit my new web site
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bobperry is offline
Old 12-30-2013
Senior Junior Member

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Montpelier, Vermont
Posts: 25
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 0

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Is there any reason for not using a super tough nipple or coupler isolator between the metal standpipe and a SS or bronze ball valve on a steel or aluminum boat?
Watercolor is offline
Old 12-30-2013
Senior Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 684
Thanks: 0
Thanked 17 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 9

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCC320 View Post
Brent,

Just curious. In all this discussion about steel vs. fiberglass, I don't recall you having posted a bit about your background. Sometime ago, Bob told us about his background and how he came to be a boat designer.

How did Brent Swain become a designer and builder of boats? What was your background before you got into this line of work? When did you elect to go with/or when did you develop the origami technique? When did you design your first boat, how many have you designed, and when was the last boat designed (you indicate that you are more or less retired and spend most of your time cruising, so I suspect you don't actively design boats anymore, but still are involved from time to time with aiding those who elect to build one of your designs.)? Are all of your designs the origami style? Just include anything that you think the forum might like to know. I know it's none of my business, but those of us on the forum might be interested to know these things.
Brent,

How about it? A designer who takes strong positions but won't reveal a little about his background .....well, what is one to make of that? Adds confidence in what he says?
NCC320 is offline
Old 12-30-2013
Senior Member

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,780
Thanks: 0
Thanked 109 Times in 100 Posts
Rep Power: 10

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Quote:
Originally Posted by Watercolor View Post
Is there any reason for not using a super tough nipple or coupler isolator between the metal standpipe and a SS or bronze ball valve on a steel or aluminum boat?
An isolator will not help as the water will be in contact with both the bronze ball valve and the hull.

A standpipe to a Marelon valve on an aluminum boat or to a stainless or Marelon valve on a steel boat is a good safe solution.

Brian
Living aboard in Victoria Harbour
mitiempo is offline
Old 12-30-2013
sunfish?junior?

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Richmond ky
Posts: 748
Thanks: 47
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 5

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Quote:
Originally Posted by Watercolor View Post
Is there any reason for not using a super tough nipple or coupler isolator between the metal standpipe and a SS or bronze ball valve on a steel or aluminum boat?
I will take a wild stab at this. Disclaimer I am a layman that works on the pipe. Ask A PE. A PE has gone to school and can give a real answer.
If you have a joint full of liquid the liquid can become the conductor. Your isolation works as long as you have an air gap and no moisture. Perfect world right . Even the bolts need isolation not just the face of the flange. Any opportunity will start and spread corrosion.
I see bronze and stainless and carbon steel mixed in many pipe systems. I think it has a lot to do with COST and how corrosive the environment is. It also has to do with how easy it is to service and what kind of mess will happen when it fails. If it happens to be a liquid /gas and corrosion can be controlled by additives and monitored it can make sense because of the COST to use valves that are more economical. Think of a boiler in a factory ( process steam ) Even the make up water needs treatment before it enters the system.
I hope some of this is good information and correct, look at my disclaimer
Good day, Lou
Lou452 is offline
Old 12-31-2013
Senior Member

Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,157
Thanks: 1
Thanked 42 Times in 40 Posts
Rep Power: 13

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Bob,

RIgger appeared happy to see me today! Nice looking bright white mast too!

Marty

She drives me boat,
I drives me dinghy!
blt2ski is offline
Old 12-31-2013
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hobart
Posts: 134
Thanks: 6
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 9

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobperry View Post
Mike:
If you want to wade thru the Wolfenzee thread you can find Brent discussing a positive righting moment of 182 degrees. I think that's when I first realized that BS has a problem with numbers and the elements of yacht design. It was good for a chuckle though.
Priceless !
MikeJohns is offline
Old 12-31-2013
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hobart
Posts: 134
Thanks: 6
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 9

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou452 View Post
I will take a wild stab at this. ........
If you have a joint full of liquid the liquid can become the conductor. Your isolation works as long as you have an air gap and no moisture. .........
Submerged the metals must have an electrical connection outside of the electrolyte ( sea water) for galvanic corrosion to occur. You need both electron flow and ion exchange which can't happen in the electrolyte alone as they cancel out. So isolating dissimilar metals works well, but they must be completely isolated electrically.
MikeJohns is offline
Old 12-31-2013
sunfish?junior?

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Richmond ky
Posts: 748
Thanks: 47
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 5

Re: Pros and cons of steel sailboats

Ok back to the boat building, I am understanding that said boat is like a wide bowl with out any ribs ?
good day, Lou
Lou452 is offline

Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.

## Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.

User Name:
OR

## Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

 Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)