I agree. I would expect up to a couple of mm on a 40' typical steel
boat. More like 2 cm on a glass boat. By the way, Ella is far from
minimim weight she has no exotic core contruction...

Cheers MC

Peter Wiley wrote:
Completely & utterly impossible to say without knowing design &
construction details and doing some sort of finite element analysis
which is way beyond my technical competence. That'd only give you a
theoretical measurement anyway.

Think about it for 5 seconds, Nav. How thick is the plating? How many
longitudinals and frames and what spacing? How many welds and at what
spacing? What sort of keel? Is the deck a different material or not? Is
the shell monococque or not? Etc etc. Steel (I know little about ferro)
boats are typically a monococque construction with steel decks attached
to the hull by welding. Plastic boats may have their decks 'glassed to
the hull but usually it's a handful of self-tappers and a tube of
sikaflex. No rigidity there.

I do know that some steel boats can be easily lifted by a couple of
eyebolts welded internally without any worries about deformation, and
others are built with their stiff, heavy keels only supported in 2
places and the plate tolerances are typically 1.5 to 2mm before
welding, to minimise possible weld distortion. They don't sag or hog as
you're using the term. Maybe a few millimeters at most.

The issue isn't repeatability at all. You're merely trying to shift
goalposts. Your Ella is a racing boat and built like one - minimum
weight and what you see WRT flexing is what you'd expect. As a class
they break in really bad weather because they're outside their design
envelope.

PDW

In article ,
The_navigator© wrote:


Yes, repeatability is the whole issue. Since you agree that steel and
ferro hulls flex, how much do they typically flex (sag/hog)?

Cheers MC

Peter Wiley wrote:


Actually quite a few sailboats *are* much more rigid than you seem to
know. You're taking your experience on plastic boats and assuming it is
generally applicable. The flex in a steel or ferrocement hull is
certainly there (everything flexes to some degree), but it's a fraction
of what is common in lightweight toy racing boats which are built to
minimal standards of seaworthiness and do, indeed, flex. In fact, the
toy boats often break when coming off a fairly moderate wave, as recent
Sydney-Hobart races have shown so well.

The remark about water being much less compressible than the boat is
pure & utter bull****. Even frozen water is a lot more compressible
than steel. Also has lower shear strength, tensile strength etc.

As to measurement of a boat to 0.005", I can easily believe that this
is possible. It's not even all that difficult. Whether there's any
point and whether the measurement is repeatable are different issues.

Peter Wiley

In article ,
The_navigator© wrote:



That boats are built differently has nothing to do with it. Sail boats
are not rigid nor even near it. To be as rigid as you suggest would
probably mean they would not float. If you had ever been in a real boat
beating to windward your would know they are *not* rigid. Put your hand
on the forstay and look at it unloading when she buries her bow and look
at it going tight on the crest (that's revealed by the luff bending).
It's loading up/unloading because the boat is flexing. If you ever get
the chance (assuming that any boat owner could put up with your big
mouth and BS) have a good hard look at the hull of a boat pounding hard
to windward and look and feel hull panels flexing. The boat needs has to
flex to reduce impact loadings because water is much less compressable
than the boat. Once again you reveal your lack of experience with big
boats by suggesting otherwise. This typifies your inability to grasp
even simple ideas.

As for measurent of a boat to 5 thou, look at the coefficent of
expansion of say GRP or even Al (which expands muchg less) and then tell
me how much a boat moves during a typical day/night temperature cycle.
Now you want to tell me it's easy to measure a 5 thou deflection over a
40' boat? Even if the boat builder had access to interferometric
equipment (which I'm sure they did not use -as there would be no point
in such an accurate measurement) it would still be hard. If you think
it's so easy how come you need a 'crew'. Lets face it this is yet more
Doug Kig (I'm a ****ing hero) BS. Have'nt you ever wonder why you don't
make more money -after all, you are such an expert...

My point is that Ella is not a large racing boat and yet still has more
than 1 ton rig tension.

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:


The navigator© wrote:




I'd say It's BS because boats are simply not that rigid


Oh yeah, and all boats are built to the same structural standard, aren't
they.




and it's hard to
measure to an accuracy of 4 thou on big objects.


Now that is total BS. It costs, but if you're willing to pay, I'll bring a
crew and and gear, and show you how to measure movement in any axis on
objects of any size & orientation down to 5 ten thousands +/- 1

It's part of what I do for a living, thanks very much. The NIST has
occasionally asked me for advice on this type of thing.





.... Even Ella has a backstay
tension of 2,500 lbs when beating.


Gee, and there's no difference between "2500#" and 15,000# is there?

Why do I bother answering your posts?

DSK

I though you were talking about the angle of the fan of soldiers lined
up behind you watching your buttocks -given your recent posts. being a
gentleman I chose not to point this out.

Cheers MC

Capt. Mooron wrote:

Oh Yeah... that's right you always have the engine on so it's irrelevant!

CM

"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...
| ?
|
| Cheers MC
|
| Capt. Mooron wrote:
|
| Oh about 32 degrees in a pinch... You?
|
| CM
|
| "The_navigator©" wrote in message
| ...
| | What's your point?
| |
| | Cheers MC
| |
| | Capt. Mooron wrote:
| |
| | How does that differ to her usual condition of standing by outside a
| harbour
| | with a fouled prop?
| |
| | CM
| |
| | "The_navigator©" wrote in message
| | ...
| | | I'd say It's BS because boats are simply not that rigid and it's
hard
| to
| | | measure to an accuracy of 4 thou on big objects. The flexability
of
| most
| | | boats is such that the side stays limit the spread of the hull
as
| the
| | | backstay is tightened (this is naval architecture 101). Current
rig
| | | tensions are much higher than they used to be. Even Ella has a
| backstay
| | | tension of 2,500 lbs when beating.
| | |
| | | Cheers MC
| | |
| | | DSK wrote:
| | |
| | | The_navigator© wrote:
| | |
| | | 4 thou. measured on the back of a boat? Complete BS.
| | |
| | |
| | | "The Captain...cap n all" wrote:
| | | I would have thought so.
| | |
| | |
| | | AFAIK there was no reason to BS about it, the boat was a one-off
| | | and paid for. If I am interpreting the article about the boat
| | | correctly, the distortion was measured at the mid length along a
| | | straight from stem to center transom.
| | |
| | | If one is installing high powered hydraulics to control the rig,
| | | it makes sense to make the hull & deck structure as rigid as
| | | possible, within reasonable weight limits. I haven't seen any
| | | figures for the distortion measured on the newest IACC boats but
| | | the early 1990s boats had very high rig loads (10K kg and up)
| | | and very little (if any) distortion.
| | |
| | | Fresh Breezes- Doug King
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|

What a pathetic post.

Cheers MC


Flying Tadpole wrote:


Peter Wiley wrote:

snip

The issue isn't repeatability at all. You're merely trying to shift
goalposts. Your Ella is a racing boat and built like one - minimum
weight and what you see WRT flexing is what you'd expect. As a class
they break in really bad weather because they're outside their design
envelope.



Was it so bad a voyage/tour of duty, Peter, that even on your
return you insist on clubbing insensible elephant seals?

I was referring to the 'only place' comment by DSK.

Cheers MC

otnmbrd wrote:
On a tanker, Dresser couplings are used less for temperature
fluctuations, than for longitudinal flexing due to load and or working
in a seaway.
The same would apply to the flex joints that DSK was talking about.

otn

The_navigator© wrote:

They are common in engineering in an pipe system that is exposed to
wide temperatuire fluctualtions.

Cheers MC

otnmbrd wrote:

About the only place I've seen "expansion joints", is on Navy ships
(which is not to say some passenger ships might have them).
On a tanker, the only place you'll see them will be on catwalks and
in piping (G can get downright squeaky).
Tankers, being built with longitudinal framing, tend to bend more, in
that direction.

otn

DSK wrote:

otnmbrd wrote:


Doesn't really matter what size the boat is, you will get some
degree of
"flex", especially when you remove it from the water and put it on a
hard stand. BG you want to see flex, you should watch and listen
to a
large tanker at sea, or watch one go from hog to sag when loading.





Sure. Why else would they build expansion joints into the upper
decks of big (or even
medium-sized) ships?

DSK wrote:

The navigator© wrote:


Yes, repeatability is the whole issue.


Why?

Repeatability is always an issue when measuring things,

yes that's why.


but is there some
specific reason why a boats rigidity should be uniform & consistent? To what
standard should it be?



.... Once again you reveal your lack of experience with big
boats by suggesting otherwise.


Really? Is it you that's been following me around all my life? Maybe you can
really tell me how many big boats I've sailed, I never did keep a written tally
myself.


Of course not.

....This typifies your inability to grasp
even simple ideas.


You mean like how to measure things?


As for measurent of a boat to 5 thou, look at the coefficent of
expansion of say GRP or even Al (which expands muchg less) and then tell
me how much a boat moves during a typical day/night temperature cycle.


Why is that an issue? BTW did you miss the thread about how much an aluminum mast
expands or contracts due to temp variation?


Now you want to tell me it's easy to measure a 5 thou deflection over a
40' boat?


Sure is. All you need is a yardstick slightly longer than the boat.

Yardstick. Riiiiight.


Even if the boat builder had access to interferometric
equipment (which I'm sure they did not use


Now you're claiming you were there? How do you know what they used?


Want to put money on it? Let's email them.

.... -as there would be no point
in such an accurate measurement) it would still be hard.


Not really, if you know how.


The usual pompous DSK response that hints at knowlege where there is none.


My point is that Ella is not a large racing boat and yet still has more
than 1 ton rig tension.


Umm, Navvie©..... did you think that the terms '1-Ton' and the like refer to the
rig tension carried by the boats of this particular class?

An you accuse me of introducing irrelevancies. Or are you confused as to
what a 1 ton class is? Let me guess -you think 1 ton class boats weigh 1
ton -quick off to the web and check little Doggie!


BTW the specific boats I had in mind, which had aluminum struts forming a big
truss inside, were 'IMP' (designed by Ron Holland IIRC) and 'Ydra' (which was a
German entry in the Admirals Cup IIRC) and the Canada's Cuppers which I already
mentioned. Ben Lexcen (Bob Miller) designed at least one boat with the same type
structural elements.

So now you've found out it's a truss (a truss here is not a medical
support Doug). Yes, that is correct and trusses were used quite widely.
They still are in some cases around highly loaded points.

Now, lets go back to your original statement which I said was BS. Let me
remind lest you think you've moved goal posts and escaped. You said:
"At one point FROM the late 1970s THROUGH MAYBE the late 1980s it was
fairly common to have a GEODESIC GRID of aluminium struts inside,
COMPLETELY OBSTRUCTING THE CABIN."

The caps are to highlight the BS. Completely obstructing the cabin?

Bwhahhahaha. BULL**** EXPOSED.



Do you still think it's all BS? Will you never learn?

But I think you've confirmed I seem to know more about boat design and
construction than you. So what am I supposed to learn from you, the art
of BS?

Cheers MC

Bwhahhahahha. Run away Doggie.

Cheers MC

The_navigator© wrote:

Not one of those boats "have a geodesic grid of aluminum
struts inside, completely obstructing the cabin".

C'mon post the evidence!

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:

The navigator© wrote:


Common? Name 20 racing boats that Can you even name one?



Sure. Most of the top One Tonners and Half Tonners between about 1977 and
1985. That's not 20, but it's more than one. Jan and Meade Gougeon
built two
Canada's Cup racers with such strut grids. When I get home and consult my
stack of old racing newsletters, I can post more names, designers,
builders,
and the competitive venues... if I deem it worth my time to continue
making
a fool of you...



You are such a BS artist.



Hardly. The problem here is that I state many truths which are outside
your
limited experience.

DSK

Really? Can you name one?

Cheers MC

Peter Wiley wrote:

As a class
they break in really bad weather because they're outside their design
envelope.

Well, it's in harmony with its subject matter, what did you
expect?

The navigator© wrote:

What a pathetic post.

Cheers MC

Flying Tadpole wrote:


Peter Wiley wrote:

snip

The issue isn't repeatability at all. You're merely trying to shift
goalposts. Your Ella is a racing boat and built like one - minimum
weight and what you see WRT flexing is what you'd expect. As a class
they break in really bad weather because they're outside their design
envelope.



Was it so bad a voyage/tour of duty, Peter, that even on your
return you insist on clubbing insensible elephant seals?


--
Flying Tadpole

-------------------------
Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace!
http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com

More!

Cheers MC

Flying Tadpole wrote:

Well, it's in harmony with its subject matter, what did you
expect?

The navigator© wrote:

What a pathetic post.

Cheers MC

Flying Tadpole wrote:


Peter Wiley wrote:


snip

The issue isn't repeatability at all. You're merely trying to shift
goalposts. Your Ella is a racing boat and built like one - minimum
weight and what you see WRT flexing is what you'd expect. As a class
they break in really bad weather because they're outside their design
envelope.



Was it so bad a voyage/tour of duty, Peter, that even on your
return you insist on clubbing insensible elephant seals?

Good lord

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:

Steel is
surprisingly limp all by itself.