|
Whacky design thought
A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came
up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? -- Matt Langenfeld JEM Watercraft http://jem.e-boat.net/ |
Whacky design thought
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:24:16 GMT, Matt Langenfeld
wrote: A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. That sounds a bit like a stripper I once dated, actually. G I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? Maybe both. I have a name for it, however: "The Cuttlefish" or maybe "Squiddy the Boat" R |
Whacky design thought
Hi
"Matt Langenfeld" skrev i en meddelelse nk.net... A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg That's a very interesting design , easy to produce a prototype for , the reserve boyancy seem to have a function ,but can you stay onboard when it is kicked around ? P.C. |
Whacky design thought
"Matt Langenfeld" wrote in message
nk.net... A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? Innovative? Yeah, but not completely. Some downriver canoes have the pronounced concavity where the paddle shaft goes and some have pronounced flairs aft to recover some of the roll stability. Their radical shapes are, I think, dictated more by rule-skirting than hydrodynamics. Silly? Most 'new' designs look just plain silly to me. Functionally, I think you'd see two significant effects. First, pushing the bouyancy out to the ends will tend to make the boat pitchy. You might need foam forehead and nose pads on the foredeck. It wouldn't be a waterfall boat. Second, if you visualize the fore-and-aft displacement map, you'll see a pattern that looks like a hogged hull (negative rocker), and this will surely have an effect of the boat's yaw response. How much? I dunno. I like the advice another poster offered. Build one. You don't have to say a word if it doesn't work. Cheers, Fred Klingener PS No 'h' in wacky? That's whack, man. |
Whacky design thought
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:16:24 GMT, "Fred Klingener"
vaguely proposed a theory .......and in reply I say!: remove ns from my header address to reply via email Basically you have taken the central part out of the fat bits on some of the sit-on-tops...ummm...scupper Pro IIRC. Problems? Depends on the use. (1) Turbulence around the sudden change at each end would slow the boat, even with the horizontal "diamond" taper shown. Needs to be run gradually into the boat to the paddle point. (2) If turning sharply, the boat could be a bit sluggish. The ends need to be slim. (3) While the boat would lift well to a wave, it would also be very rocky, and pound. (4) roll-righting could be tough. As was said, build one or modify an old boat that you know to be tippy....then let me know. I have wondering about this sort of idea for years. "Matt Langenfeld" wrote in message ink.net... A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? Innovative? Yeah, but not completely. Some downriver canoes have the pronounced concavity where the paddle shaft goes and some have pronounced flairs aft to recover some of the roll stability. Their radical shapes are, I think, dictated more by rule-skirting than hydrodynamics. Silly? Most 'new' designs look just plain silly to me. Functionally, I think you'd see two significant effects. First, pushing the bouyancy out to the ends will tend to make the boat pitchy. You might need foam forehead and nose pads on the foredeck. It wouldn't be a waterfall boat. Second, if you visualize the fore-and-aft displacement map, you'll see a pattern that looks like a hogged hull (negative rocker), and this will surely have an effect of the boat's yaw response. How much? I dunno. I like the advice another poster offered. Build one. You don't have to say a word if it doesn't work. Cheers, Fred Klingener PS No 'h' in wacky? That's whack, man. ************************************************** ** sorry ..........no I'm not! remove ns from my header address to reply via email Does Bill Gates dream of electronic sheep? |
Whacky design thought
Because the enlarged ends are too low in the water in your design, the boat would be slowed because the water would have to travel around them. First out, then in, then out, then in. This would cause turbulance which will slow the boat. If the increased volume ends rode higher on the hull and were less exaggerated they would work better. If blended into the hull shape they would look better. This would amount to a hull with flaired ends at the gunnels and "tumblehome" amidships. This concept is used possibly, though in a more subtle way, on a boat called a Baidarka, invented a long time ago in the Aleutian Islands or Russia. The fuller ends will also have the effect of making the boat ride over the waves rather than going through them. Balancing the two movements is a tradeoff either way. Do you want a corky buoyant hull that seesaws over the water or a fast sleek hull that slices through the water? Your hull would produce a boat that was extreme on the seesaw side. Also, when your boat is leaned over to turn, the turbulance increases and slows the boat alot. I think your concept is interesting but that the features are too exagerated to be practical. It also makes for a hull shape that is more complex to build than ,say, a Greenland style Kayak. Matt Langenfeld wrote: A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? |
Whacky design thought
Matt Langenfeld wrote: A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? What is the beam of the boat? If it's extemely narrow in the center, it might work OK. If it's 20+ inches in the center and really wide at the ends, you'll end up with a boat that pitches and pounds over waves and will be hard to keep upright in beam seas, as it will be difficult to lean and/or edge. |
Whacky design thought
Old Nick wrote:
(2) If turning sharply, the boat could be a bit sluggish. The ends need to be slim. That's a very good point. Edging the boat would not lift the ends clear of the water. Rather, they would dig in, probably making the boat harder to turn than if it was on an even keel. They would also add drag whenever the boat is edged or leaned or the water is uneven. |
Whacky design thought
I it one thing to guess by looking at the picture but a good way to try this
design out would be to make a 1/16 model and test it in a tank or even if its possible the naval academy invented a program to test ship hull designs and since then it has been made available to the public some manufacturers use it to start their canoe designs off. Sorry I can't remember the name of the program I know Swift canoe and Kayak uses it se if they mention it on their site. Till it is physically tested and put through a simulation no assumptions on wave friction or drag can be made you never know what works out. -- Abe Elias Diving Sparrow Paddle Co, http://home.cogeco.ca/~aelias "Brian Nystrom" wrote in message ... Matt Langenfeld wrote: A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? What is the beam of the boat? If it's extemely narrow in the center, it might work OK. If it's 20+ inches in the center and really wide at the ends, you'll end up with a boat that pitches and pounds over waves and will be hard to keep upright in beam seas, as it will be difficult to lean and/or edge. |
Whacky design thought
I figure that anything powered by hand, e.g. rowing or paddling or pedaling
or ..., needs to have minimum resistance through the water. I think a more traditional canoe body will move through the water better. You might consider close-in outrigger type slim pontoons or a bi-hull instead. This would allow you to manage putting fine entry and exits on the hull forms. Think "skinny catamaran with canoe in the middle" to imagine what I am thinking of, only you'd have a cat type pair of mini-hulls forward and aft, none in the middle. I think that maneuverability will suffer no matter what. Hmmmm? Brian "Matt Langenfeld" wrote in message nk.net... A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? -- Matt Langenfeld JEM Watercraft http://jem.e-boat.net/ |
Whacky design thought
It's just a mock up to promote thought. I hadn't really assigned
dimensions. I was thinking 18" max mid-ship. Great feedback all! Appreciated, truly. Brian Nystrom wrote: Matt Langenfeld wrote: A friend and I were goofing around talking about hull shape and we came up with this: http://www.jem.e-boat.net/images/Development/XYak1.jpg The idea was stability and reserve buoyancy but still having the ability for nice tight vertical strokes. I'm not sure what to think. Innovative or just plain silly? What is the beam of the boat? If it's extemely narrow in the center, it might work OK. If it's 20+ inches in the center and really wide at the ends, you'll end up with a boat that pitches and pounds over waves and will be hard to keep upright in beam seas, as it will be difficult to lean and/or edge. -- Matt Langenfeld JEM Watercraft http://jem.e-boat.net/ |
Whacky design thought
steveJ ) writes:
Because the enlarged ends are too low in the water in your design, the boat would be slowed because the water would have to travel around them. First out, then in, then out, then in. This would cause turbulance which will slow the boat. another way of lookign at this is in a "normal" boat the paddler has to work to push the water aside at the bow and again to overcome the suction as the water comes togehter again at the stern. In a wasp-waisted waterline the water is pushed aside twice and the suction overcome twice so its extra work. again, the paddler has to work to overcome the friction between the hull and the water. On a wasp-waisted boat there would be more surface area in contact with the water, hence more surface friction, and the paddler has to work harder to move the boat through the water. there are wierd boats that are harder to move though the water but they satisfy some other imporant requirement. a white water kayak comes to mind. these boats depend on water current to move them along. they sacrifice speed and ease of paddling for maoeuverability. such boats are special purpose. if you have a special situation where the wasp-waisted boat would be better than a normal boat which paddles easier go for it. I wasn't actually able to look at the boat because the computer at the public library was denied access to the Developement web page for some reason. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
Whacky design thought
I know ...why not design it so your hull extensions are OUT of the water
until the paddler tips 10 degrees or so? Brian "William R. Watt" wrote in message ... steveJ ) writes: Because the enlarged ends are too low in the water in your design, the boat would be slowed because the water would have to travel around them. First out, then in, then out, then in. This would cause turbulance which will slow the boat. another way of lookign at this is in a "normal" boat the paddler has to work to push the water aside at the bow and again to overcome the suction as the water comes togehter again at the stern. In a wasp-waisted waterline the water is pushed aside twice and the suction overcome twice so its extra work. again, the paddler has to work to overcome the friction between the hull and the water. On a wasp-waisted boat there would be more surface area in contact with the water, hence more surface friction, and the paddler has to work harder to move the boat through the water. there are wierd boats that are harder to move though the water but they satisfy some other imporant requirement. a white water kayak comes to mind. these boats depend on water current to move them along. they sacrifice speed and ease of paddling for maoeuverability. such boats are special purpose. if you have a special situation where the wasp-waisted boat would be better than a normal boat which paddles easier go for it. I wasn't actually able to look at the boat because the computer at the public library was denied access to the Developement web page for some reason. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
Wacky design thought
You might have something there.
This wasn't intended to be a speed racer. Just a WACKY ....lol.....idea about something stable for fishing but without having to reach way over the sides to paddle. If I did get into a serious design, I'd smooth out the transitions to minimze turbulence. I even know the name for it..."The Bone" because of the shape. Brian D wrote: I know ...why not design it so your hull extensions are OUT of the water until the paddler tips 10 degrees or so? |
Whacky design thought
snip
PS. There's no H in wacky. Depends on how hard inspiration hit. :-) |
Wacky design thought
Hi
"Matt Langenfeld" skrev i en meddelelse ink.net... If I did get into a serious design, I'd smooth out the transitions to minimze turbulence. And why that ------ turbulence is acturly just what can eliminate drag , make the wet surface act different , but ofcaurse you need the feel about how a hull act or rather the spots where it is a good idear to with turbulence. The boyancy can also come in handy, as you se with north sea vessels ----- just emagine one of these without the huge stern, it would not climb the waves but go strait into it , beside that far from the middle of the boat the extra volume will proberly make the hull more smooth moving. Realy the art about making a good fast design, is to have the feel about how turbulence could effect maby two thirds of the hull , making less drag than what you would expect as an amature builder. Anyway you will not know before you made atleast a scale model, making such one, would be very easy if you just had the framework to place the panels. -------------- Now Im'e not talking about 50 Kilo of clamps just to hold temp. frames , but an assembly framework that would support itself while showing the exact form, --------- like what you se here ; http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cyber-Boat/ P.C. |
Wacky design thought
"P.C." ) writes:
And why that ------ turbulence is acturly just what can eliminate drag , make the wet surface act different , but ofcaurse you need the feel about how a hull act or rather the spots where it is a good idear to with turbulence. a kayak with a bulb under the bow, now there's a wacky thought -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
Wacky design thought
Hi
"William R. Watt" skrev i en meddelelse ... "P.C." ) writes: And why that ------ turbulence is acturly just what can eliminate drag , make the wet surface act different , but ofcaurse you need the feel about how a hull act or rather the spots where it is a good idear to with turbulence. a kayak with a bulb under the bow, now there's a wacky thought Well if you ever looked down at the water near the hull, with just a row boat, you be surprised that some of the water stay in the same place even the boat move with good speed ; --------- it's like some places on the hull surface ,the same water circulate slowly , leaving the "wet surface" being one inbetween two different turbulent small currents. Or looking behind a boat while moving, you also se the same water and bobbles staying the same distance from the end of the boat, even other water just inches away ,just rush past. --------- Also formig cirtain parts of the hull, can make the water rush as out a tunnel from parts of the hull, where the drag will vaccum other water in slower but in bigger quantities ; only thing that will show is a model. P.C. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:20 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com