JAXAshby wrote:

dougies, the capsize ratio is widely discredited as a predictor of anything
but
being the capsize ratio.

"Discredited"? By whom?

everyone, dougies, but you.

Please explain... as of the fall of 2003, there
were a number of offshore races around here that required a certain CSR
for certain classes.

and some races won't allow a Westsail 32 in (too small) but will allow a Hunter
33 (big enough). idiots abound, dougies.


... You can find some pretty horrible boats with ratio's
as low as 1.75 and far better boats with 1.95+.

Well, that's very true given the wide lattitude in defining "horrible"
and "better."

many truly horrible Hunter boats have c/r below 2.00, even down to about 1.75
IIRC.

Any, dougies, should you have taken care to learn what capsize ratio is ou
would have learned that is is nothing but the ratio of the displacement to beam
times some unnatural acts. It says not a thing about where that displacement
is in relation to the buoyancy. It is the kind of thing that makes a
non-too-good sailor like a Cabo Rico 38 look good in the telling.



the capsize ratio takes too little into consideration to be much more than
a
quite guide.

Kind of like your posts, huh?

DSK

a vortex formed by
trailing edge turbulence is at the trailing edge.

you don't understand the meaning of the word, "vortex", for there is no vortex
at the trailing edge. check the dictionary.

.. Different dynamics, different effects.

Wait a minute, I thought you said they formed for the same reason?


they do, but the **dynamics** AND the **effects** are different. which word
didn't you understand?

DSK

many truly horrible Hunter boats have c/r below 2.00, even down to about 1.75
IIRC.

And don't forget the well respected J Boats which off have a bad ratio rating.

RB

a vortex formed by
trailing edge turbulence is at the trailing edge.



JAXAshby wrote:
you don't understand the meaning of the word, "vortex", for there is no vortex
at the trailing edge. check the dictionary.

The one that said you were wrong about "vortices"?

Anyway, a vortex can certainly form at a trailing edge. In general, ones
that do are temporary.... but then MC asked about shedding and he wasn't
(I assume) talking about dogs.

One way to suppress a tip vortex is to deliberately induce a vortex
slightly inboard along the trailing edge. That is part of what makes
wing keels work.



.. Different dynamics, different effects.

Wait a minute, I thought you said they formed for the same reason?



they do, but the **dynamics** AND the **effects** are different. which word
didn't you understand?

Oh, I understand the words just fine. Your explanation is a little bit
fuzzy, though. Would you clarify?

DSK

jesus h. crhist dougies! knock it off! that was the worst bull**** I have
EVER seen you come up with!

a vortex formed by
trailing edge turbulence is at the trailing edge.



JAXAshby wrote:
you don't understand the meaning of the word, "vortex", for there is no
vortex
at the trailing edge. check the dictionary.

The one that said you were wrong about "vortices"?

Anyway, a vortex can certainly form at a trailing edge. In general, ones
that do are temporary.... but then MC asked about shedding and he wasn't
(I assume) talking about dogs.

One way to suppress a tip vortex is to deliberately induce a vortex
slightly inboard along the trailing edge. That is part of what makes
wing keels work.



.. Different dynamics, different effects.

Wait a minute, I thought you said they formed for the same reason?



they do, but the **dynamics** AND the **effects** are different. which
word
didn't you understand?

Oh, I understand the words just fine. Your explanation is a little bit
fuzzy, though. Would you clarify?

DSK

JAXAshby wrote:
jesus h. crhist dougies! knock it off! that was the worst bull**** I have
EVER seen you come up with!

Considering that I don't need to "come up with bull****" that wouldn't
be hard.

DSK

DSK wrote:

.... Ring
any bells?



MC wrote:
Yes, but you got the equation wrong.


No, that's the right equation. I see the problem... you don't know WTF
you're talking about.


So you really aren't very good at maths are you? Fancy not seeing that
the equation you posted is wrong even after I pointed it out. Do you
really want to be further humiliated by my spelling out our error? Think
carefully Doug, the position of the parentheses are important.



The correct equation is directly proprtional to the metacentric radius


Instead of blabbing about the metacentric radius, how about looking at a
well known and widely used formula, and taking the time to understand it?

But no, you'd rather babble, that way you can continue to feel smart.



Babble? I think it's you that's babbling. Look up the word.


.. That anyone would seriously use this formular in trying to decide
seaworthiness is a most unwise practice -naval architects don't!


In the absence of more detailed measurements, it's better than nothing.
And it is a useful measure when comparing vessels of similar size and form.

BTW the CSR is not used anywhere I know of for an offshore rating
certificate, but it is occasionally used as a screen for allowing
vessels to enter a particular race.

So, we agree on the first but I know of no race there the capsize screen
is used in that way. Can you give an example?

Cheers

DSK wrote:


MC wrote:


Well if you know the answer then post it.


I may or may not know the answer, but at least I know the question.

... I'll be impressed


Impressing you is not among my concerns.

.... if you can correctly state the boundary conditions for vortex
shedding.


Are you talking about a starting vortex, a tip vortex, or trailing edge
turbulence?


Good lord.

Cheers

DSK wrote:

JAXAshby wrote:

dougies, the capsize ratio is widely discredited as a predictor of
anything but
being the capsize ratio.


"Discredited"? By whom? Please explain... as of the fall of 2003, there
were a number of offshore races around here that required a certain CSR
for certain classes.


Really? Such as?

Cheers

"Discredited"? By whom? Please explain... as of the fall of 2003,
there were a number of offshore races around here that required a
certain CSR for certain classes.



MC wrote:
Really? Such as?

The Annapolis-Bermuda race, for one. There are a couple of
point-to-point SAYRA races where the phrase "CSR will be used as an
indicator of acceptability" but I haven't heard of them booting any
applicants. Of course, nobody has entered a J-30 either.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King