Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort - Page 7 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > On Board > Boat Review and Purchase Forum > Sailboat Design and Construction
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree60Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #61  
Old 04-09-2013
grumpy old man
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,515
Thanks: 1
Thanked 70 Times in 66 Posts
Rep Power: 4
bobperry will become famous soon enough
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

I love doing very different boats. The SLIVER project is going well in Hadlock, Washington. The interior, built externally, is complete and in the hull. The deck is now on and we are addressing the details of the deck. The keel fin is welded up and the bulb has been cast. Everything is coming together very nicely. While the SLIVER project is within 24" LOA of the PSC project it would be hard to find two monohulls more different. The PSC boat is a big, complex boat with all the ameneties and more. The SLIVER is the epitome of simplicity.
Attached Thumbnails
Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort-cwdeck.jpg   Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort-portlight14.jpg  
jameswilson29 likes this.
__________________
Please visit my blog. It's fun to read.


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.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #62  
Old 04-09-2013
Jeff_H's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,501
Thanks: 3
Thanked 81 Times in 62 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

(Bob, Please make that four fans, since you can count me in as a fan….)

But back to the topic of this tread, with regards to the rest of the thread, it is interesting to see an ancient thread like this one come back to life, and to look back at things which I wrote perhaps a decade or so ago, from the present with the luxury of hindsight. I cringe when I look at the title “Modern Hull Forms and motion comfort” seeing as “modern hull forms” are not modern hull forms now.

It does not surprise me that symptomatic of so many internet discussions, reading some of this thread, I see science driven discussions seemingly vying on an equal footing with emotional driven responses, with overly broad brush comments being made on both sides, and refuted with snap shot anecdotal evidence taken sometimes from the exceptions.

One thing that struck me in reading my own comments is that some of what I wrote has become dated in that the world of ‘modern hull forms’ that I referred to in 2001, has moved on in a different direction than I would have expected at the time. In 2001, I thought the science was pushing performance yacht designers towards hull forms and rigs which produced well rounded designs, boats that were easy to handle, had comfortable motions, and sailed well in a very broad range of conditions. But as it turned out the world of fast boats took a turn toward a very different direction, and that new direction is affecting production boats in ways that I am not fully convinced will produce wholesome designs.

At the time that I wrote some of those comments, I had attended a number of lectures on what was happening in the science of yacht design. It was a time when VPP driven racing rules were more popular than they are today, and so well balanced designs seemed to be emerging from the racing world and the ideas filtering out of the racing world were working their way into mainstream yacht design in a very positive way for cruisers.

At that time, the oft repeated claim in this and similar threads, that that race boat designers do not care about motion was patently false. Designers had come to the realization that the motion of a boat was an 'unrated' aspect of speed. Designers had known for a long time that the various motions of a boat underway interrupted the flow of air around the keel and sails, and that the force of waves striking the hull, and the deceleration forces of rapid pitch, yaw and roll, sapped speed from the boat.

Around the time that I had written some the items which are quoted above, there was very serious investigations into ways of minimizing motion and reducing acceleration and decelerations. While these investigations were predominantly about improving unrated speed, the lessons about how to improve a boat’s motion had great relevancy to the motion comfort of cruising yachts.

And while much of the ‘lessons’ of this research was well known “Doh” moments, the ability to study dynamics of boat passing through waves as seen over time, with precise measurement of the forces involved as compared to the rotational and linear motions, allowed the understanding of the science of motion comfort to advance very quickly.

The key lessons that came out of the research began with some simple core points:
• It is important to minimize the forces which are causing unwanted motion.
• It is important that the forces that cannot be reduced are handled in a way that they occur progressively rather than suddenly.
• It is important that as the boat moves through a reoccurring cycle, that the amount that the vessel gets out of phase with reoccurring be minimized as a strategy to minimize the amount of the force imparted as the boat tries to get back into phase.
• That as much as possible it is important to dampen motion in a way that does not work to get the boat out of phase.

The tactics to address these strategies had to consider the way that forces entered and left the system over time, whether these were linear or rotational, and whether these were one time events or cyclical events. When I read some of the comments above about bow shape and the collision with waves, these are presented as two dimensional concepts, by which I mean, that the ignore the transitional properties of waves passing a boat in motion over time.

With this better under standing of these strategies, the shape of boats and their weight distribution changed. Plumb bows with finer entries were not only about speed, but also about reducing the force of the collision with each wave and allowing that force to build progressively so that less force was felt by the boat and crew. The moving of the center of buoyancy aft also moved the momentary longitudinal axis of rotation aft, and with the greater distance between the point of immersion and the axis of rotation, through simple geometry, the angle of rotation of the boat was reduced and so the occupants free less rotational motion as well as vertical motion since they are also closer to the axis of rotation and so rise a shorter distance for any given pitch angle.

Similarly, out of the science the cross sections of the hull forms had changed as well. Hull forms went from the large flat areas of the earlier designs to more elliptic sections which progressively increased in form stability with roll angle and so progressively dampened roll as well as ‘sensing’ the shape of the wave face and helping the boat to remain in phase with the waves and minimizing the kind of snap rolling that was more common on earlier lighter displacement for their length designs.

The roll moment of inertia was increased by placing larger bulbs on deeper draft keels. That slowed the natural roll rate, while the weight carried low developed leverage working counter to the roll and so further reducing roll angles. Deeper length, shorter chord foils also provide greater dampening as their sideward motion more effectively generated moments resisting rolling with out adding as much drag inducing wetted surface as would be the case with a shorter aspect keel would need to generate the same roll dampening.

And the net result was that as these ideas filtered into cruising boat designs, it resulted in some wonderful cruising boats. Boats that are fast and forgiving, with comfortable motions and so on.

But what I had not counted on was the ability to designers to employ computer design, to produce wildly beamier boats, which ride on the turn of their bilge in semi-displacement mode, effectively behave closer to a multihull than a monohull, and which easily plane when there is enough wind. Without computer modeling, I think it would be next to impossible to create tame versions of these boats, but with the use of twin rudders and sophisticated dynamic trim modeling, designers have been able to produce successful versions of this concept.

Still and all, I have very mixed emotions about these designs. Clearly they are very fast, and properly designed can be moderately easy to handle, but I am not convinced that these are well rounded designs, or that they make sense as cruising boats as least at the skill levels of most sailors out there.

But I also want to touch on a couple of the anecdotal items that the thread accumulated. SloopJB mentioned a quarter tonner that he owned that had a very comfortable motion. I, like many people, toss around the term IOR design, like the term describes a single hull form and rig. But in fact, the IOR evolved over a relatively long period of time, so that it is kind of like the term Victorian Architecture, which when really considered carefully really was a broad collection of styles. And in the many variants of the IOR era, there was a surprisingly wide range of hull forms. What SloopJB seems to be describing is what I called the ‘clamshell period’ in which the boats had vee’d sections from bow to stern. Good examples of that might be the Seidelmann 25 or the Tanton Quarter tonners of that era. Whatever their other attributes, going upwind in a chop these boats did display less pitching and a gentler start and stop to the pitch than might be expected for their weight and timeframe. To some extent the basis of that gentler motion is that when seen in section they progressively built buoyancy in much the same way that early IMS era designs progressively built buoyancy with their fine bows when seen in plan.

As to Wolf’s physics defying Atkin’s, I would say this, Atkins was a master at modeling heavy displacement hull forms in a way that went far beyond what the numbers might predict. But even Atkins was not a miracle worker. The laws of physics do eventually kick in. So while it may be true that Wolf’s boat performs better than might be expected, and it may be true that it performs better than some modern designs, especially if they are not skillfully handled, I would respectfully suggest that Wolf’s Atkins will not out perform the better designs of the past 30 years. I can tell you that as the wind builds even a design as dated as my own boat more quickly out distances more traditional designs as the wind builds, and newer designs clean my clock. When it comes to winds of 20 knots or above, its pretty easy to sustain close to 8 knots upwind at a much higher pointing angle than a similar length traditional design, let alone a similar displacement traditional design. I have a pretty easy time reaching at a sustained 8-10 knots in wind speeds of that range with brief surfing well above that. You just cannot do that with a traditional boat of the same displacement or length.

And similarly, having owned traditional boats of the same displacement as my boat, from a motion comfort standpoint, a well drawn more modern design will offer far superior motion to a traditional design of the same displacement.

The fact is that boat design has evolved not through marketing per se, but through a better understanding of the science which allows a well drawn modern design to offer greater speed, motion comfort and a lot more space for a given displacement and or pricetag (since displacement almost as much as anything else controls cost).

That said, I would rather look at Wolf’s boat rather than mine any day, but if I wanted to sail anywhere, I’d still take mine…..

Respectfully,
Jeff
jameswilson29 and One like this.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay and part-time purveyor of marine supplies

Last edited by Jeff_H; 04-09-2013 at 03:49 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #63  
Old 04-09-2013
grumpy old man
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,515
Thanks: 1
Thanked 70 Times in 66 Posts
Rep Power: 4
bobperry will become famous soon enough
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

Holy cow! That boy can type!
jameswilson29 and SloopJonB like this.
__________________
Please visit my blog. It's fun to read.


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.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #64  
Old 04-09-2013
Jeff_H's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,501
Thanks: 3
Thanked 81 Times in 62 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

Yeah, but the bigger questions is whether I was able to explain in a way that is understandable.....
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay and part-time purveyor of marine supplies
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #65  
Old 04-09-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: new england
Posts: 1,598
Thanks: 31
Thanked 24 Times in 21 Posts
Rep Power: 2
outbound is on a distinguished road
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

Great thread and it's phenomenal to have Bob Perry ( a hero for many years ) on it. Still, have a question. Seems a given to assume ultra modern designs sail faster in more circumstances but is there a limit imposed by the design parameters as regards comfort motion. I see the light hulls, beamy aft hulls flying in semi displacement mode and wonder if a wave slaps against the usually unwetted portion of the aft canoe body ( except when running) will it produce a snap heave or corkscrew motion that many find most unpleasant. I also wonder about the sensitivity of the ultra modern hulls to the weight cruisers impose on their vessels. To what extent does the skipper need to attend to "trimming ship" when loading and is there a risk that overloading with stores or that 300' chain rode will screw the whole thing up. Lastly even when operated within design displacement ( with weight central/aft and low)given the semi planning behavior, decreased wetted surface with the boat on the water instead of in it -are these designs evolving to approximate the ride of a cigarette boat with a testosterone drunk driver.
__________________
s/v Hippocampus
Outbound 46

Last edited by outbound; 04-09-2013 at 05:51 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #66  
Old 04-09-2013
grumpy old man
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,515
Thanks: 1
Thanked 70 Times in 66 Posts
Rep Power: 4
bobperry will become famous soon enough
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

Jeff:
You did a boffo job. You went where I feared to tread and you tread softly.

Outbound:
I'm not really comfortable with "hero". How about "old guy who has tried and is still trying hard".

I'll let Jeff answer your questions. He is so much better at it than I am. Besides I am scrubbing my bottom getting ready for my only grandchild's, Violet, very first birthday party. I am talking her out for an intimate Italian dinner. I suppose the rest of the fam will have to tag along. But for me and Violet it will be Brunello followed by Amarone tonight. Grampy's putting on the dog.
Attached Thumbnails
Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort-violet-easter-2013-9.jpg  
__________________
Please visit my blog. It's fun to read.


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.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #67  
Old 04-09-2013
Faster's Avatar
Just another Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Westminster, BC
Posts: 14,603
Thanks: 67
Thanked 178 Times in 174 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

Totally off topic, but, from one proud grandfather to another, that's one cute little girl!
Cheers
Ron
__________________
Ron

1984 Fast/Nicholson 345 "FastForward"

".. there is much you could do at sea with common sense.. and very little you could do without it.."
Capt G E Ericson (from "The Cruel Sea" by Nicholas Monsarrat)
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #68  
Old 04-09-2013
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,160
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

Outbound when you say that "ultra modern designs sail faster in more circumstances but is there a limit imposed by the design parameters as regards comfort motion" you are, to use a expression used by others, painting with a too broad brush. I assume that for ultra modern designs you are talking about contemporary designs that sail fast but there are not one single typology of performance cruisers.

There are for all tastes and with very different characteristics, from very light boats to more heavier but more powerful boats (more B/D ratio or draft), from moderated beam boats (some even considered narrow by modern parameters) to beamy boats.

Even in what regards ORCI and IRS there are two different schools regarding light and "heavy" boats, not to mention boats that were developed taking in account the learning from solo racing boats in what regards stability and easiness, that have a different typology.

All are fast, some better upwind some downwind but each case is a case and all have different characteristics in what regards sea motion and heeling (that's also important for comfort).

Regards

Paulo
__________________

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

Last edited by PCP; 04-09-2013 at 07:37 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #69  
Old 04-09-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: new england
Posts: 1,598
Thanks: 31
Thanked 24 Times in 21 Posts
Rep Power: 2
outbound is on a distinguished road
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

I guess you're right I did paint with too broad a brush and apologize. I was trying to speak to the derivatives of the solo racing boats where weight seem to detract from speed and the placement of that weight may significantly alter performance. Use of cored bulkheads as well as hulls and no expense spared to lessen weight. I understand and have employed manifolds to decrease holes in the hull due to resultant increase in drag from thro hulls and deployed inward distortion of the hull aft of large hull holes ( e.g. bow thruster) in the same attempt but I cruise not race so remain enamoured of carrying significant "excess baggage". I wonder if inside that paradigm of cruising designs derived from current racing designs there is a physical limit or significant restriction due to the design elements . Kind of like when you are on a trawler fishing or a deep vee center console there is no question the trawler is more likely to have greater comfort at rest and probably in motion even if both designs are well executed using computer assisted design. I understand for the working elements ( reaching and spinnaker poles etc) excess weight is the enemy of safety and ease of working the boat But I was in my obstruse way trying to answer a more fundamental question. I was also trying to ask if the same applies to the modern "slice of pie" hull shape. Kind of like there a limit to an aircooled engine v. watercooled. Does the basic design elements limit the comfort one can achieve even in best hands? Paulo I was asking a question. Though it was obvious it wasa questoneven in absence of "?"

p.s.- grandkids always steal your heart- have too much fun- Bob I still think you're up there with N.H. a few others. Your designs are classics and the new ketch is a thing of beauty. Sliver should go to wind like a bat out of hell. You seem to design boats that work and are still art forms.
__________________
s/v Hippocampus
Outbound 46

Last edited by outbound; 04-09-2013 at 09:08 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #70  
Old 04-10-2013
One One is offline
Always tired
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 235
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 2
One is on a distinguished road
Re: Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort

In my experience, even old boats benefit from having excess weight removed. In other words, I think that regardless of the boat you have, paying attention to weight makes a difference.

Outbound, you mentioned cruisers, and I have to say that cruisers (broad brush, I know) tend to keep loading stuff on board. Yes, that included that 300' of chain rode, several heavy anchors, all in the name of "safety". But, to me - and this is solely my opinion - if you overload a boat, that may mean less safety in the real world. And the extra weight in the fo'c's'le for that 300' of chain may well mean submarining in heavy seas - something most old designs weren't designed for. I also question carrying anything and everything with you (diving equipment, compressors, generators, huge amounts of tools, two dinghies, welding equipment) and what else people carry on even small boats, thinking that it's okay, it's an old, stout boat and it weighs a lot empty.

Obviously, that's a broad brush. A old fishing vessel will obviously be able to carry more safely, but a narrow one with fine stem and stern will not be able to carry much, especially at the ends.

Last edited by One; 04-10-2013 at 02:37 AM. Reason: Added a bit
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply


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

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Seakindly Boats vs.the rest rmf1643 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 14 04-10-2013 03:26 PM
What can you tell from the numbers? brazilnut Boat Review and Purchase Forum 10 07-01-2009 04:09 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 PM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012