Jump to content


Volvo 70 design


  • Please log in to reply
214 replies to this topic

#101 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:55 PM


..
Note that if I am right about the Tele repair, none of the three boats have had core shear in the bow...


Not at all trying to hold a pissing contest, just sharing info : If my intel is correct, at least one of them indeed had core shear...

Roger that.

#102 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:20 PM

Finot and VPLP have had strain and inertial sensors for data logging in some of their designs for some time , Finot even tried fiber optic sensors to monitor panel warping and fluttering if I'm not wrong . There used to be a good paper written by both Finot and Conq about monolithic panels on their old website that had actual numbers from structures that where tested on some of their designs ,it was very informing .


#103 Koukel

Koukel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,022 posts
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 07 April 2012 - 12:43 AM

[quotename='Yachtdynamics' timestamp='1333735444' post='3661224']
I think your grasp on the English language is lacking , read the postings againand you will see the pick is on the design or box rule , not the designers ,they are limited by the rule like in every design class , so stop your personalnit picking and add something good to the conversation or troll some otherthread .
Sorry to the rest of you who are here for the conversation , I am just sick ofthe trolls trying to ruin every posting
[/quote]
You are a douche bag. Oh wait. You own a 50 footer. Make that douche bag owner. Haven't ever sailed with one of those before.

I don't even have a problem with your argument, just your personal style. I encourage you to reply. You should start with how much more you know about sailing than I do. No wait, make fun of me blathering in front of a PC instead of from the nav station of a real ocean racing thoroughbred. Wait, wait! Call me a troll, call me a troll first, then write about how its really big of you to post here and lower yourself to my standards and then go highbrow like your only goal is for the good of the sailing community.

I read your first post, your second, your third and your tenth. If you were a bit smarter or raised better, you would act more humble and not so much like a... well a douche bag. Cheers!

Koukel

#104 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 01:55 AM

Doug , haven't you worked with bamboo fibre cloth ? What are the specs on that does it have good impact and sheer stability? I know it is a pretty tough material as a compressed laminate for use in wood structures and I'm seeing all kinds of pretty cool applications for it . I'm still convinced crew fatigue has a fairly large role to play in beating up the 70's although the Imoca 60's are driven mostly by the autopilot so it may be unfounded .I understand a structure that is to stiff could have the same catastrophic results ,like the Orma fleet in the Trans Atlantic ,but what about adding longitudinals in the area and having smaller unsupported panels ,could this give more structural control over the overall structure ?This was done on the W60 Yamaha after seeing huge movement of the panels between ring frames . They where placed at roughly the heeled waterline then again half way between there and the sheer , it definitely got the panels to behave .

#105 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 07 April 2012 - 02:21 AM

1333685996[/url]' post='3660274']
Good grief yachtdynamics. It's really nice that you respect authoritative figures and appreciate their input, but everything Merf, Doug and Steve have said has refuted your entire rant that "the designers" are "at fault".

Did you really not notice that?


I think your grasp on the English language is lacking , read the postings again and you will see the pick is on the design or box rule , not the designers , they are limited by the rule like in every design class , so stop your personal nit picking and add something good to the conversation or troll some other thread .
Sorry to the rest of you who are here for the conversation , I am just sick of the trolls trying to ruin every posting


Is it on "the design" or is it on "the box rule"? Basically, you have had your ass handed to you on both (hoping you understand there is a difference).

Not to say you are a liar, but yeah, you have also been railing against the designer's choices, including regarding keel-stepped masts, monolithic hulls, lack of "crew protection", etc. as well as the design itself supposedly making boats that make professional sailors "chuck up" in a way that made leg 4 horrible. The title of your piece is "idiotic inshore design". Who exactly do you think makes the VOR design rule? Gremlins in a marsh?

I don't pretend to be the world's best offshore sailor, or the world's most experienced offshore sailor by any long shot imaginable. I do think I've got enough experience to see bullshit though. Maybe I'm wrong though, and maybe you are the bomb that should be in there setting these morons straight?

If so, why are you here on an obscure interweb forum?

Update: Oh shit. Now you are talking about fucking bamboo as a structural material.

#106 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 02:48 AM

Could this be one of the problems of the delam

Minimum Panel Weights

  • Hull bottom up to 300mm above DWL forward of MFS including the entire collision bulkhead. 11kg/m2

    Hull topsides and transom. 7.4 kg/m2




    300mm is not very far above DWL and an area that is getting slammed when heeled then an abrupt change in panel weight from 11kg/m2 to 7.4kg/m2 ,could this be a possible cause of the delam on Azzam ? Maybe raising the height to 600mm and putting an intermediate panel weight in between the two would stop the hard spot ?


#107 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,195 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 07 April 2012 - 03:37 PM

Doug:
I was indeed being flip.
I don't know the specifics of any of the laminates.
But almost any cored laminate will be more durable with higher density/sheer strength core and more fiber in the skins.
It is very rare that this doesn't work.
Put 20 kg more laminate in the bow skin and bump the core spec is a pretty generic comment.

The other area where cored laminates fail is in the core-skin bond. This is an area where engineers and racers are always at odds with the builders. Builders always want more, engineers always want less.

On the C Cats, the core bond is the heaviest single component of the hull skin, weighing more than the core or the skins. But it is also the critical component because if it fails, neither of the other is worth crap. To a great extent, one of the boat building specific problems is how to get a good core/ laminate bond without using an autoclave. Modern boat building is as much about how to successfully process aerospace materials without using the proper tools. There are autoclaves that big, but we can't afford to use them, so we use vacuum bags and ovens and take our chances.
The physics of what happens to a bubble in a vacuum bag and in side an autoclave is very different. In an autoclave it gets smaller, in a vacuum bag it gets bigger. The vapor pressure is also different, so bonding materials in the core/ laminate bond line may foam in a vacuum where they will not in an autoclave. With most projects, this is down in the "who really gives a shit" level. But when you really need all the the little things to be right, it can make the difference between cracking up and finishing.

I build such small parts and my loads are tiny by comparison. As a result, the building blocks are relatively larger. So decisions for my projects are usually down to do I put a one ply patch on it or a two ply patch. It's much harder to get wrong.
This is also why I almost always advocate a lower tech approach to building things.
"Aim low, they're riding chickens!"
SHC

#108 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,541 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:35 PM

"Aim low, they're riding chickens!"
SHC


Might steal that from ya Steve. Adaptation of "Shoot Low, Boys - They're Ridin' Shetland Ponies" but i like it more.

#109 Koukel

Koukel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,022 posts
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:42 PM

This is an area where engineers and racers are always at odds with the builders. Builders always want more, engineers always want less.
On the C Cats, the core bond is the heaviest single component of the hull skin, weighing more than the core or the skins. But it is also the critical component because if it fails, neither of the other is worth crap. To a great extent, one of the boat building specific problems is how to get a good core/ laminate bond without using an autoclave. Modern boat building is as much about how to successfully process aerospace materials without using the proper tools. There are autoclaves that big, but we can't afford to use them, so we use vacuum bags and ovens and take our chances.

I love how we're all trying to quantify the risk / reward of building and racing and advertising on these boats. For me its an avocation, so all fun and games, but I'd argue the concepts hold true whether for ego stroking or real life or death stuff like feeding your family or dodging bad guys.

Anyway its fun for us amatuers to play in the same pond as you all who really know and don't just speculate. Dig the passion.

Koukel

#110 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:55 PM

Quite a few years ago ,Jimmy Betts used aluminum tooling that was water heated through channels in the back of the tooling ,every section of the tooling could be temp controlled to within a few degrees and had a multitude of temp sensors over the whole surface . I was very impressed with how well the temp could be ramped up and down during curing . It was a smaller boat designed by Bruce Nelson and Jim built a few with his own fabricated autoclave . I guess he found some surplus aerospace pressure vessel at the time when aerospace left California and set up all the control systems himself . I don't know what ever happened to all the tooling when he left Truckee for Washington State .

#111 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 07 April 2012 - 11:10 PM

Quite a few years ago ,Jimmy Betts used aluminum tooling that was water heated through channels in the back of the tooling ,every section of the tooling could be temp controlled to within a few degrees and had a multitude of temp sensors over the whole surface . I was very impressed with how well the temp could be ramped up and down during curing . It was a smaller boat designed by Bruce Nelson and Jim built a few with his own fabricated autoclave . I guess he found some surplus aerospace pressure vessel at the time when aerospace left California and set up all the control systems himself . I don't know what ever happened to all the tooling when he left Truckee for Washington State .

By definition all less than 100C. These days, it is more interesting to use the electrical resistance of the carbon mould (or even part itself) to generate heat. Not done much, but it is done.

And as for the pressure vessel, it is not advisable to just throw some pressure on a piece of surplus uncertified equipment. These things are not for the faint of heart, or budget.

The parts I refer to were built and Marstrom composites. Top flight group.

#112 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:32 AM

1333840220[/url]' post='3662963']

1333839303[/url]' post='3662952']
Quite a few years ago ,Jimmy Betts used aluminum tooling that was water heated through channels in the back of the tooling ,every section of the tooling could be temp controlled to within a few degrees and had a multitude of temp sensors over the whole surface . I was very impressed with how well the temp could be ramped up and down during curing . It was a smaller boat designed by Bruce Nelson and Jim built a few with his own fabricated autoclave . I guess he found some surplus aerospace pressure vessel at the time when aerospace left California and set up all the control systems himself . I don't know what ever happened to all the tooling when he left Truckee for Washington State .

By definition all less than 100C. These days, it is more interesting to use the electrical resistance of the carbon mould (or even part itself) to generate heat. Not done much, but it is done.

And as for the pressure vessel, it is not advisable to just throw some pressure on a piece of surplus uncertified equipment. These things are not for the faint of heart, or budget.

The parts I refer to were built and Marstrom composites. Top flight group.

Hi Doug ,Yeh , Bob Derektor postcured a mast he built for Mirabella using resistance of the carbon , but was getting hotspots in certain areas due to more resistance . He was a facinating man and did some research of his own on panel delam due to slaming , he built a test boat which he filled with bags of cement then hoisted the boat up 20' in the air and dropped it in the water with loadsensors wired in all over , it closed the whole yard down at Derektors in Florida as all the crews wanted to see this boat dropped numerous times into the water from way in the air .The surplus pressure vessel was a certified part used for testing by one of the aerospace companies on a prototype project then mothballed . When they left California for Washigton State ,they gave it away for pennies on the dollar and I believe Jimmy did get it recertified or checked over before using it . I just thought the hot water curing was pretty innovative .



#113 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 11:02 AM

i am a structural and mechanical engineer, now this reply will be kept to simple terms, other wise i'll be here all day. i have with somewhat joy, read the following articles, and it seems that only if you have the highest of credentials may you have an opinion, or even have won the americas cup/volvo numerous times may you be taken even remotely seriously.
my job, is to design composite structures, i have done this for 30 years, i have designed helicopters, worked for the euro space agency, and now i work in a very senior position for a F1 team, a position that i and my team of people work in stay very much in the background, which i have done for some years, i would say i am more than qualified, twice now i have been approached to build a volvo 70, twice i have turned the offer down, in simple terms, to make that boat as the greatest piece of engineering we can, there isnt enough time, sailing could learn alot from motorsport, it would also bring your costs down. you in general hire people who are known within your circle, not always for there talent, we hire from the best engineering universities in the world, we activiely find the best, and help them. not hinder or attack.

what Mr Owen and Mr Clark have said could not be better put, i would hope other designers and engineers follow suit, bravo. what pushed them to post on a internet forum is probably something to do with the personal attacks that seem to take place, in my world, we have huge budgets, and we deal with variables that we have data for that would boggle even the brightest of people, we struggle, i have spoken with on more and more occasions with sailors, and designers, more often the sailors are the hardest to gauge with respects to what is achievable in a build process, we propose limits on our cars, so a driver can judge with our help how to get the best, and please dont presume because i dont sail i dont understand the principles of load, water dynamics, i work at the leading end of composite design, a design process that covers more variables than most can comprehend.
this is an extreme sport, and it seems that most people that post on this forum have an insight into the top end of it, after speaking to some engineers witht regards to the recent Bank Pop record, the team that sails, runs a very safe program, limits on speed, loads, sea state etc etc, so would it not be entirely prudent for the same principles to be applied to the 70, this is of course down to the team, an F1 driver is not an engineer, but does input into how we build the car, down force speed etc, funnily enough one of the leading F1 mech engineers, is probably the worst driver i have ever been in a car with, in yet his systems have won numerous championships, my point being, yes have an opinion, but with out truly knowing the depths of the subject, and the complex frame work that is required i would probably be slightly less prone to verbally attacking anyone who might have another angle, if for one second your opinion on this site was to be portrayed to your peers, and your somewhat internal anger that seems to come out via words, (trolls!!!!) i would be very surprised if you were ever employed again, if sailing is going to survive in a climate that is incredibly hard on every sport, it needs to evolve and the people in it must. lets look at design, maybe if the teams were aloud to practice more, test the boat, the boat would not be so alien the the teams in general, sailors are not paid huge amounts in reflection to what they do, shore team members are not paid for the commitment that they put in, the cost lies in the fact you are going round a planet. common sense after this race will prevail. untill then its no arms race, its commitment from everyone involved that will make a team win. sailing is no different than any technological sport, dont be fooled to think you are elite. you are just dealing with factors that are now more apparent and public, those problems have always been there, that is a fact.

#114 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:11 PM

Thanks outsideengineer.

Do composite engineers even design in terms of "factors of safety" anymore, or are you using reliability analysis theory instead?

Abstract of John T. Christian's paper "Reliability Related to Factor of Safety and Uncertainty" (American Society of Civil Engineers).

Many engineers have recognized that the value of the factor of safety of a geotechnical structure is less important than its reliability or the probability of failure. In this context "failure" is defined according to Leonards’ well-known description as "unacceptable difference between expected and observed performance." Considering any type of structure or system for which a factor of safety can be computed, placing all the known and unknown uncertainties into the standard deviation of the factor of safety, and assuming that the factor of safety is normally or lognormally distributed, we can find the relation between the probability of failure, the expected value of the factor of safety, and the variance in the factor of safety. In addition to providing a quick graphic estimate of the probability of failure, the resulting plots reveal that, when the standard deviation exceeds approximately 0.3, increasing the expected value of the factor of safety has little effect on the probability of failure. In such cases reducing the uncertainty by better engineering is more effective in improving reliability than increasing the target factor of safety. The results apply to any type of structure and any mode of failure.


Moving away from the factor of safety concept has been a large battle in the geo-engineering field for a long time.

#115 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:21 PM

1333882943[/url]' post='3663398']
i am a structural and mechanical engineer, now this reply will be kept to simple terms, other wise i'll be here all day. i have with somewhat joy, read the following articles, and it seems that only if you have the highest of credentials may you have an opinion, or even have won the americas cup/volvo numerous times may you be taken even remotely seriously.
my job, is to design composite structures, i have done this for 30 years, i have designed helicopters, worked for the euro space agency, and now i work in a very senior position for a F1 team, a position that i and my team of people work in stay very much in the background, which i have done for some years, i would say i am more than qualified, twice now i have been approached to build a volvo 70, twice i have turned the offer down, in simple terms, to make that boat as the greatest piece of engineering we can, there isnt enough time, sailing could learn alot from motorsport, it would also bring your costs down. you in general hire people who are known within your circle, not always for there talent, we hire from the best engineering universities in the world, we activiely find the best, and help them. not hinder or attack.

what Mr Owen and Mr Clark have said could not be better put, i would hope other designers and engineers follow suit, bravo. what pushed them to post on a internet forum is probably something to do with the personal attacks that seem to take place, in my world, we have huge budgets, and we deal with variables that we have data for that would boggle even the brightest of people, we struggle, i have spoken with on more and more occasions with sailors, and designers, more often the sailors are the hardest to gauge with respects to what is achievable in a build process, we propose limits on our cars, so a driver can judge with our help how to get the best, and please dont presume because i dont sail i dont understand the principles of load, water dynamics, i work at the leading end of composite design, a design process that covers more variables than most can comprehend.
this is an extreme sport, and it seems that most people that post on this forum have an insight into the top end of it, after speaking to some engineers witht regards to the recent Bank Pop record, the team that sails, runs a very safe program, limits on speed, loads, sea state etc etc, so would it not be entirely prudent for the same principles to be applied to the 70, this is of course down to the team, an F1 driver is not an engineer, but does input into how we build the car, down force speed etc, funnily enough one of the leading F1 mech engineers, is probably the worst driver i have ever been in a car with, in yet his systems have won numerous championships, my point being, yes have an opinion, but with out truly knowing the depths of the subject, and the complex frame work that is required i would probably be slightly less prone to verbally attacking anyone who might have another angle, if for one second your opinion on this site was to be portrayed to your peers, and your somewhat internal anger that seems to come out via words, (trolls!!!!) i would be very surprised if you were ever employed again, if sailing is going to survive in a climate that is incredibly hard on every sport, it needs to evolve and the people in it must. lets look at design, maybe if the teams were aloud to practice more, test the boat, the boat would not be so alien the the teams in general, sailors are not paid huge amounts in reflection to what they do, shore team members are not paid for the commitment that they put in, the cost lies in the fact you are going round a planet. common sense after this race will prevail. untill then its no arms race, its commitment from everyone involved that will make a team win. sailing is no different than any technological sport, dont be fooled to think you are elite. you are just dealing with factors that are now more apparent and public, those problems have always been there, that is a fact.


OSE ,Great post and input , this is what we need here ,insight into the many problems the guys are having sailing these boats ,that puts them further in danger . Every large project I have worked on I have always wanted folks from Formula racing to get involved as they have a work ethic and Big Matcy Temperament that is way and above anything ( I worked with an F3 team for a while ) You are so correct about hiring within the circle ,I think it's driven by the fact that people in the industry try to surround themselves with others they have worked with or are comfortable with as they try to produce something that is at the cutting edge of the industry at the time . This seems to happen more with the offshore projects as a lot of ACup teams are starting to tap into your industry to find better ways to do things both in build and in element design and testing . A few of the top end projects in the marine industry are starting to use Cosworth data systems to gather all the info available . I think your industry will help with the next big step forward in structures and better understanding of drag induced force as aerodynamics and hydrodynamics get closer .The French definitely run a very different show and are very focused on even the smallest details in every aspect of the whole project and the more Anglosaxons as the French call the rest of the world sail with them the more they are amazed at how clean and different everything is done .More testing and more sailing is definitely the way forward , but a lot of rule makers shy away from that route because of budget ,they try to put a cap on spending to make it more attractive to potential sponsors which even cuts out multi boat testing . Teams are not allowed to test together to gather hard data with a good baseline using the other boat to gauge performance increases ,and you find teams purchasing previous generation boats to try figure out what is needed and where they can make improvements for the latest generations . You even find teams with multi race budgets tying up certain team members with large retainers for the following race because of their knowledge of the previous race . I think because sailing is not a mainstream media sport yet like F1 the budgets are tight and few between so race organizers are trying to get as many entries as possible by setting limits in the wrong areas .We definitely need more people with the likes of you and your fellow Formula guys in this industry to take it to the next level , so please keep your interest in this flowing and post where you can , I certainly appreciate your input.

#116 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:42 PM

Thanks outsideengineer.

Do composite engineers even design in terms of "factors of safety" anymore, or are you using reliability analysis theory instead?


safety factors play a role at every level, the only difference when say for example your a designing composite for the aerospace industry, and even F1, is the amount of data you have, so the factors are smaller, much smaller, when building a 70, if you are in the region of a few mm, you are doing well, we are dealing with 2 decimal places, designing a yacht where there are unknown variable such as load when you hit a wave at high speeds require a level of common sense aswell as prior knowlege, i dont doubt for one minute when a VOR 70 is designed, and you are dealing with a one off, even if you have a previous winning solution, the design is new, and its takes time to gather that information, which in it self makes the process longer, in my opinion and this is only my thoughts, more time must be spent analysing this, when the team is in port, and at sea, how much logged hours are spent looking at this? very little compared to other sports, i know, i have seen the data, and it might only be a few people, even NAS car, where you have little variables the data is always being checked, and remember you cant even change the aero dynamics of a NAS car, well within reason. in F1 when the car is slow, it is very public and the driver makes that clear, and to a degree its open, we dont then concern ourselves about the failure, we work out why, and if we blame someone, we dont make it public in general, lets look at the failures of the previous leg, nearly all problems (groupama ex) are to do with laminate failure one way or another, the questions are not directly aimed at the designer, a question should be asked, was the stopover long enough in NZ? how was the data handled after the previous leg, speed is useless if you cant sail, every designer cant be wrong, every team cant be wrong, these are very smart people, they helped build the rule, time is the issue, mostly, a sponsor runs the show, fact, they dictate to a degree how long you have, before and during the racing, making a team limit there time sailing, when you are still dealing with a rule which is unrefined is fruitless. the designers engineers and builders are all trying to make the lightest, fastest, stiffest (where needed) boat, i have been in boat building yards, many, and if you have panel failures due to glue not curing, lets not go into details, i would look at how much dust is in the air, why are you cutting wood where there is lamination taking place, dont use another room, use another building! i have no idea why the laminates failed, i do know that there is a long list of factors that need addressed before that, and its a big list.




#117 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:01 PM

with regards to safety factors, you will never step away from that, if i was to go into all the factors engineers need to, it would bore even myself, the fact is, there is no rule, there is only 1. what info you had, 2. what you have come up with, 3. what you need it to do, and 4... the important one, how much are you going to push it.. that comes from information, nothing more, nothing less, the gentleman you mentioned is very clever, read between the line of the quote and you will see, the above 4 points. i still learn and innovate, and i do this by following the above points, in no particular order, i also still make mistakes, and thats ok, we sign sponsorship deals, and yes there is more money, but with that comes more problems, problems that most people dont see, and believe me it effects design, and sailing is no different. sailing will catch up, americas cup is doing so, the VOR will , and even your production boat, it all filters, so when it comes to safety factors, on some production yachts its 50%, now thats alot. but you dont want to kill someone do you! smaller margins are the same, but your dealing with a smarter group of people, and that has to come into play, and maybe some luck! sometimes engineering is just lucky, and common sense. sometimes its 50,000 man hours and a failure. designers spend alot of there time looking at the people involved as much as they spend designing.

#118 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:05 PM

Exactly, sponsors and principals dictate the tempo. Limiting training and testing in an around the world race is foolish, penny wise pound foolish. The best prepared and most talented team should win.

#119 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:06 PM

The phenomenon of loudly and publicly throwing individual people or groups of people under the bus, where this is almost certainly a large team effort, has disturbed me too. Why would anyone want to be involved in a field where that happens?

Regarding factors of safety versus reliability, the "most competitive" design would be one where all systems of a factor of safety of 1.01. Where it does its job for the entire race with no extra weight or expense. Obviously there are a lot of systems on almost every boat that had safety factors less than one.... That said, reliability analysis would help determine those systems where decreased factors of safety are reasonable, and those systems where regardless of the factor of safety, increased reliabiliy against failure cannot be achieved with that method. Either way, more data is needed.

So yes, there are a lot of reasons for the failuress, and I'm surprised to find out there isn't more data collected. Sensor technology is becoming so light (sometimes literally as in optic strain gages), and data storage so cheap and ubiquitous, it seems it is more a point of priority than cost.

It seems crazy to me that there are rumblings of radically changing the VOR design when they still don't have enough data to make this design reliable.

#120 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:26 PM

every team is going to have to work to the same safety factors then, not taking sensor technology on board because of weight issues is 100% stupid, completely stupid, do you think the information on a F1 car is sent off via postman!. its no good when a bulkhead falls out, now i am not a boatbuilder, but that came out quite clean, so i would say they have other issues. issues that would be spotted given more time, can you for one second imagine something like that happen in F1, you would be very sure to make sure there was a very good explanation.
the amount of data isnt enough, not near as much as you require to make decesions on panel weights, where foam/core is put, etc etc make it alot simpler and just tell everyone that this is where they need certain areas of safety, until then, you will continue to go in circles. if you are honestly telling me, that boating building yards, designers and engineers all think completely different, and there is no common path on laminate lay up, where you put foam in places of fatigue etc, then i think you are finding your problem, because that to me, is with out doubt a huge problem, and a base line start to failure, not being able to make that call , thats like a civil engineer designing a bridge not exactly sure what he is going to hold the bridge up with... yet... a slight exaggeration, but valid, i am struggling not to put an engineers hat on, and stay typing like a normal person, when building these boats, they are not pushing the envelop of design, not by a long way, these are simple structures that fail, i am sorry, i know huge amount of time goes into designing these, but sometimes you need to take a step back, and think about common sense.

#121 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:44 PM

1333899766[/url]' post='3663622']

1333897887[/url]' post='3663584']
Thanks outsideengineer.

Do composite engineers even design in terms of "factors of safety" anymore, or are you using reliability analysis theory instead?


safety factors play a role at every level, the only difference when say for example your a designing composite for the aerospace industry, and even F1, is the amount of data you have, so the factors are smaller, much smaller, when building a 70, if you are in the region of a few mm, you are doing well, we are dealing with 2 decimal places, designing a yacht where there are unknown variable such as load when you hit a wave at high speeds require a level of common sense aswell as prior knowlege, i dont doubt for one minute when a VOR 70 is designed, and you are dealing with a one off, even if you have a previous winning solution, the design is new, and its takes time to gather that information, which in it self makes the process longer, in my opinion and this is only my thoughts, more time must be spent analysing this, when the team is in port, and at sea, how much logged hours are spent looking at this? very little compared to other sports, i know, i have seen the data, and it might only be a few people, even NAS car, where you have little variables the data is always being checked, and remember you cant even change the aero dynamics of a NAS car, well within reason. in F1 when the car is slow, it is very public and the driver makes that clear, and to a degree its open, we dont then concern ourselves about the failure, we work out why, and if we blame someone, we dont make it public in general, lets look at the failures of the previous leg, nearly all problems (groupama ex) are to do with laminate failure one way or another, the questions are not directly aimed at the designer, a question should be asked, was the stopover long enough in NZ? how was the data handled after the previous leg, speed is useless if you cant sail, every designer cant be wrong, every team cant be wrong, these are very smart people, they helped build the rule, time is the issue, mostly, a sponsor runs the show, fact, they dictate to a degree how long you have, before and during the racing, making a team limit there time sailing, when you are still dealing with a rule which is unrefined is fruitless. the designers engineers and builders are all trying to make the lightest, fastest, stiffest (where needed) boat, i have been in boat building yards, many, and if you have panel failures due to glue not curing, lets not go into details, i would look at how much dust is in the air, why are you cutting wood where there is lamination taking place, dont use another room, use another building! i have no idea why the laminates failed, i do know that there is a long list of factors that need addressed before that, and its a big list.




Very good points OSE . A few years back I was offered a job with a now defunked composite aircraft builder . I went to the factory to discuss this offer with management and they gave me a factory tour . I was shocked to see a team laying down precut prepreg in a fuselage half mould ,measuring layer position with a tape measure from no reference point and standing on the uncured prepreg while laying up , there was also someone grinding on a piece of tooling frame not 10' from the open mould ,little to say I declined the offer although very lucrative .You are correct in questioning the length of the NZ stopover . The previous leg was mostly upwind in some pretty nasty conditions making most of the crews sick . Although all the boats did full ultrasonic testing ,you have got to wonder what kind of damages where caused from the continuous pounding ie: cyclic life of structure . This as well as the guys being very fatigued from the previous leg and the lateness in heading into the Southern Ocean I think added up to the chain of events leading to failures . I think the fatigue factor has a big part to play in this with reduced reflexes and reactions to wave slamming . I raced down there in the 80's and the cold bites into you so badly ,you just can't do things as fast and you can't eat enough to replace the energy consumed . Everybody starts loosing muscle mass as well ,so you become weaker and use more effort to do things so it's a vicious cycle .I believe if you kept the crew dryer and more protected from the continuous firehose spray ,it would slow the cycle of depletion then maybe the crew could react faster to the hole in the ocean or the wave that puts them on their side .Every iteration of these box rules be it VO70 ,Imoca60 or TP52 get faster so next time the guys go around the hosing is going to be more extreme and the fatigue is going to follow , the rule needs to then change to accommodate this . If you look at the deck layout ,you will see an inshore design ,this may have been ok for the W/VO60's but it's not so for the 70's A good example of this follow what was good is the US aircraft carrier Midway now a floating museum in San Diego . When initially designed the designers followed the age old spec that the British had been using and that was to have an open bridge on the boat , it's first deployment was in the North Atlantic taking in a short tour of the arctic . The captain of the boat asked superiors to call the tour short to return to the shipyard for modifications to enclose the bridge as the sailors where to exposed to the elements and could not react fast enough to certain criterion ,and they where nowhere near getting wet constantly .I don't know exactly what it is to stop the breakage , but something has got to change for the next race , either the design ,the route , the time or the crew ,and I think the design is probably the most likely and easiest to change

#122 moody frog

moody frog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Location:Brittany

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:55 PM

1333840220[/url]' post='3662963']

1333839303[/url]' post='3662952']
Quite a few years ago ,Jimmy Betts used aluminum tooling that was water heated through channels in the back of the tooling ,every section of the tooling could be temp controlled to within a few degrees and had a multitude of temp sensors over the whole surface . I was very impressed with how well the temp could be ramped up and down during curing . It was a smaller boat designed by Bruce Nelson and Jim built a few with his own fabricated autoclave . I guess he found some surplus aerospace pressure vessel at the time when aerospace left California and set up all the control systems himself . I don't know what ever happened to all the tooling when he left Truckee for Washington State .

By definition all less than 100C. These days, it is more interesting to use the electrical resistance of the carbon mould (or even part itself) to generate heat. Not done much, but it is done.

And as for the pressure vessel, it is not advisable to just throw some pressure on a piece of surplus uncertified equipment. These things are not for the faint of heart, or budget.

The parts I refer to were built and Marstrom composites. Top flight group.

Hi Doug ,Yeh , Bob Derektor postcured a mast he built for Mirabella using resistance of the carbon , but was getting hotspots in certain areas due to more resistance . He was a facinating man and did some research of his own on panel delam due to slaming , he built a test boat which he filled with bags of cement then hoisted the boat up 20' in the air and dropped it in the water with loadsensors wired in all over , it closed the whole yard down at Derektors in Florida as all the crews wanted to see this boat dropped numerous times into the water from way in the air .The surplus pressure vessel was a certified part used for testing by one of the aerospace companies on a prototype project then mothballed . When they left California for Washigton State ,they gave it away for pennies on the dollar and I believe Jimmy did get it recertified or checked over before using it . I just thought the hot water curing was pretty innovative .


Aluminum moulds : I don't know if Jim Betts' mould was cast aluminum or else.
Anyway, water-temperature-controlled moulds have been pretty much in use in the board-manufacturing industry I know pretty well.
I think we tried anything from epoxy moulds with cure in a heating press (press-to close the mould) to water-heated epoxy moulds and aluminum moulds.

In a non-composite process I used for several years water-cooled aluminum moulds (i.e with the same sort of built-in piping) cost is mind-boggling ! a mould with capacity for a board from 8' to 12' would set you down some 250,000 US.
I would hate to think about the cost of a 70' mould, given that the highest cost in the mould is the 5D milling-machine time.

We are currently having 3' parts made of a carbon composite in an aluminum mould then autoclaved to cure. Again the mould-cost/size ratio is mind-boggling.
Our subcontractor has been building Imoca's foil-daggerboards in the same process, I was so schocked at the cost of the moulds for those, that I even did not pay attention if there was any water-system. I'll sure check next time ;)

Anyway this seems to put aluminum moulds well outside the grasp of racing-yacht builders.

#123 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:08 PM

1333902404[/url]' post='3663692']
every team is going to have to work to the same safety factors then, not taking sensor technology on board because of weight issues is 100% stupid, completely stupid, do you think the information on a F1 car is sent off via postman!. its no good when a bulkhead falls out, now i am not a boatbuilder, but that came out quite clean, so i would say they have other issues. issues that would be spotted given more time, can you for one second imagine something like that happen in F1, you would be very sure to make sure there was a very good explanation.
the amount of data isnt enough, not near as much as you require to make decesions on panel weights, where foam/core is put, etc etc make it alot simpler and just tell everyone that this is where they need certain areas of safety, until then, you will continue to go in circles. if you are honestly telling me, that boating building yards, designers and engineers all think completely different, and there is no common path on laminate lay up, where you put foam in places of fatigue etc, then i think you are finding your problem, because that to me, is with out doubt a huge problem, and a base line start to failure, not being able to make that call , thats like a civil engineer designing a bridge not exactly sure what he is going to hold the bridge up with... yet... a slight exaggeration, but valid, i am struggling not to put an engineers hat on, and stay typing like a normal person, when building these boats, they are not pushing the envelop of design, not by a long way, these are simple structures that fail, i am sorry, i know huge amount of time goes into designing these, but sometimes you need to take a step back, and think about common sense.


Amen OSEBeing involved with various designs in the past ,most designers concentrate on hydrodynamics and making the boat fast first ,which is a little harder that doing an aerodynamic structure because of the medium then they put the skeleton in or structure and ergonomics comes last ,then it's usually up to the crew to do the deck layout with the available structure that is outlined by the rule .This often leads to failed structures because of lack of current data or models to work to . A very good example of this was the maxi cat Playstation and the French designed maxi cats . The French had a lot of data gathered from sailing Multihulls for years and M and M had very little to design to , with the result of having a much heavier boat that needed a major redesign and modification after it was first sailed , but at least the box was more open to design changes and there was time enough to test and modify .This generation of 70's have many sensors and data collection systems ,but a lot of the atmospheric sensors have 1hz update rates up to a maximum of 20 Hz , I dont think this is even close enough to gather accurate info on panel flutter or dynamic compression loading ,but I stand to be corrected .I believe you guys have sensor rate in the KHz range to gather your data .Please continue to wear your engineer hat ,it is enlightening to hear different views on how to achieve better results

#124 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:27 PM

you do not need someone like me to say this, fact is to be successful you must have all factors in place, people, equipment, reliability, luck, backing and above all leadership, and then repeat this until you finish. when one factor is broken, all factors fail, every factor must be treated the same, now as it stems, the people and equipment are breaking, the others are still in place, but floundering, so for the next edition, what do you do, improve the ones that failed, this isnt engineering, this is common sense. simplify it, it can still be extreme while being a little understated, just until its gets it feet again, then you have a solid base to work.
design wise, you are not going to get much more extreme that you already have, you will with boat with more hulls, but that is not the problem, because your life cycle problems start again, refine what you have, nurse it, and it will be a success, the world needs sport like this, and even the chaos that surrounds it, because its entertainment, i would say the rule, for what i know about it needs ironing out, unfortunately you do not have a governing body, we have FIA, you need a governing body.
look at a F1 car, it barely resembles a car at all, but thats because the rule evolves, or gets blocked i should say, but it moves, simplify the rule, it will still make engineers work to find a better design, but it might mean you finish a race, then you get a sponsor again. dont just change it.
i agree that the crews need more protection, i cant imagine, and neither can anyone else, unless you have actually done the exact same thing, what its like, so ask them what they want, they want to do another race, its there job, they like it, it pays there bills, practicality sometimes outweighs what WE want to do, i cant drive a F1 car, but am pretty good a designing them, so if my theory is correct, then designers need more input, let us do the maths, but let them do the asking. at some point, someone will need to help the rule, or alot of people will loose there jobs.
i have just watched again, and made a couple of calls, the groupama team, pull them selves back together again, what a stand up achievement, i have also just watched the Abu Dhabi entry do the same thing, now i hold my clap, have they truely asked themselves what is failing? by all accounts this race is over for them in terms of a podium finish? what i can say is, and my composite hat is now on, if that boat had been checked (again time constraints) they would of found there problem, like any material, there is failure first, then it breaks, and composites more often than not, give you an idea its failing long before it does, you just need to know what to look for. i hope, before something serious happens, that they check that boat, because through 30 years experience working for "teams" and the best ones at that, there sponsor will be more upset if it sinks, than if it limps home everytime it gets damaged, they must address there issues and how they sail there boat, again, not everyone is wrong, use the time they have, carbon fibre is still the only product we have at our disposal that ticks all boxes, and there are some very smart composite engineers, i know i hire most of them,

#125 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:37 PM

1333904145[/url]' post='3663724']

1333855963[/url]' post='3663228']

1333840220[/url]' post='3662963']

1333839303[/url]' post='3662952']
Quite a few years ago ,Jimmy Betts used aluminum tooling that was water heated through channels in the back of the tooling ,every section of the tooling could be temp controlled to within a few degrees and had a multitude of temp sensors over the whole surface . I was very impressed with how well the temp could be ramped up and down during curing . It was a smaller boat designed by Bruce Nelson and Jim built a few with his own fabricated autoclave . I guess he found some surplus aerospace pressure vessel at the time when aerospace left California and set up all the control systems himself . I don't know what ever happened to all the tooling when he left Truckee for Washington State .

By definition all less than 100C. These days, it is more interesting to use the electrical resistance of the carbon mould (or even part itself) to generate heat. Not done much, but it is done.

And as for the pressure vessel, it is not advisable to just throw some pressure on a piece of surplus uncertified equipment. These things are not for the faint of heart, or budget.

The parts I refer to were built and Marstrom composites. Top flight group.

Hi Doug ,Yeh , Bob Derektor postcured a mast he built for Mirabella using resistance of the carbon , but was getting hotspots in certain areas due to more resistance . He was a facinating man and did some research of his own on panel delam due to slaming , he built a test boat which he filled with bags of cement then hoisted the boat up 20' in the air and dropped it in the water with loadsensors wired in all over , it closed the whole yard down at Derektors in Florida as all the crews wanted to see this boat dropped numerous times into the water from way in the air .The surplus pressure vessel was a certified part used for testing by one of the aerospace companies on a prototype project then mothballed . When they left California for Washigton State ,they gave it away for pennies on the dollar and I believe Jimmy did get it recertified or checked over before using it . I just thought the hot water curing was pretty innovative .


Aluminum moulds : I don't know if Jim Betts' mould was cast aluminum or else.
Anyway, water-temperature-controlled moulds have been pretty much in use in the board-manufacturing industry I know pretty well.
I think we tried anything from epoxy moulds with cure in a heating press (press-to close the mould) to water-heated epoxy moulds and aluminum moulds.

In a non-composite process I used for several years water-cooled aluminum moulds (i.e with the same sort of built-in piping) cost is mind-boggling ! a mould with capacity for a board from 8' to 12' would set you down some 250,000 US.
I would hate to think about the cost of a 70' mould, given that the highest cost in the mould is the 5D milling-machine time.

We are currently having 3' parts made of a carbon composite in an aluminum mould then autoclaved to cure. Again the mould-cost/size ratio is mind-boggling.
Our subcontractor has been building Imoca's foil-daggerboards in the same process, I was so schocked at the cost of the moulds for those, that I even did not pay attention if there was any water-system. I'll sure check next time ;)

Anyway this seems to put aluminum moulds well outside the grasp of racing-yacht builders.


You are right on the costs Moodyfrog they are insane ,but someone will come up with something using similar tech but different materials which may be cheaper to produce .The more input from different industries the better .

#126 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:45 PM

if that is the amount of data thery are recording, its not enough, lets look at it another way, when you design a building, you start with its looks, function, and its life cycle, most buildings now a days have a 25 year life cycle, huge, a boat like a car is old before its built, so you need to look at its function first, then structure, you know straight away you have guide lines and rules to build to, thats a given, but i refuse to believe there isnt enough data to work out the loads generated by say a winch and where it is placed.
with regards to hydrodynamics, a blind art, you have lift co's, air velocity problems, aerodynamics, load generated by waves, at every angle, but you also know what is fast, and what is slow, and you must deceide early on what is going to be your optimum design, are we going to sail fast upwind, or down wind (excuse the simplicity) but am sure you understand, you also know more importantly what has failed in the past. then dont do it again, not until every Khz of data proves you other wise, dont experiment on a final product, and designers are guilty of this, i am but there is ways to address it. if it was me, and i had the finances, i would take one of the boats at the end of this race, and use it as an experiment to find out about the panel flux, load co-eds, water dynamics over the deck, there is camera equipment that will record this, life cycle analysis, and publish it, allowing the next generation to build a better boat, and it might not be an experiment every time they go sailing, i am sure volvo cars has the kind of money that would be needed, i am also sure they could use the data for them selves.

#127 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:59 PM

1333906021[/url]' post='3663757']
you do not need someone like me to say this, fact is to be successful you must have all factors in place, people, equipment, reliability, luck, backing and above all leadership, and then repeat this until you finish. when one factor is broken, all factors fail, every factor must be treated the same, now as it stems, the people and equipment are breaking, the others are still in place, but floundering, so for the next edition, what do you do, improve the ones that failed, this isnt engineering, this is common sense. simplify it, it can still be extreme while being a little understated, just until its gets it feet again, then you have a solid base to work.
design wise, you are not going to get much more extreme that you already have, you will with boat with more hulls, but that is not the problem, because your life cycle problems start again, refine what you have, nurse it, and it will be a success, the world needs sport like this, and even the chaos that surrounds it, because its entertainment, i would say the rule, for what i know about it needs ironing out, unfortunately you do not have a governing body, we have FIA, you need a governing body.
look at a F1 car, it barely resembles a car at all, but thats because the rule evolves, or gets blocked i should say, but it moves, simplify the rule, it will still make engineers work to find a better design, but it might mean you finish a race, then you get a sponsor again. dont just change it.
i agree that the crews need more protection, i cant imagine, and neither can anyone else, unless you have actually done the exact same thing, what its like, so ask them what they want, they want to do another race, its there job, they like it, it pays there bills, practicality sometimes outweighs what WE want to do, i cant drive a F1 car, but am pretty good a designing them, so if my theory is correct, then designers need more input, let us do the maths, but let them do the asking. at some point, someone will need to help the rule, or alot of people will loose there jobs.
i have just watched again, and made a couple of calls, the groupama team, pull them selves back together again, what a stand up achievement, i have also just watched the Abu Dhabi entry do the same thing, now i hold my clap, have they truely asked themselves what is failing? by all accounts this race is over for them in terms of a podium finish? what i can say is, and my composite hat is now on, if that boat had been checked (again time constraints) they would of found there problem, like any material, there is failure first, then it breaks, and composites more often than not, give you an idea its failing long before it does, you just need to know what to look for. i hope, before something serious happens, that they check that boat, because through 30 years experience working for "teams" and the best ones at that, there sponsor will be more upset if it sinks, than if it limps home everytime it gets damaged, they must address there issues and how they sail there boat, again, not everyone is wrong, use the time they have, carbon fibre is still the only product we have at our disposal that ticks all boxes, and there are some very smart composite engineers, i know i hire most of them,


Wow OSE,Awesome post and I am glad the failures of this race are being seen for what they are by people outside the industry.I have been saying the same in a different way for a while .We have a type of governing body ISAF ,but they are not as involve as FIA .Groupama are an amazing team and will be a force to be reckoned with once everything is ironed out . I believe that there is 35 figaro races ,which is a very nasty one design race shared amongst the crew along with numerous round the world races and most are very accomplished single handed sailors in their own right and capable of doing most things needed on the boat and not just specialized in one or two things . They are very much into regrouping and figuring out what went wrong . I had the privilege of spending 3 years working on the ORMA circuit in France and was exposed to the intensity of their prep and execution .Thank you once again for posting your great incite into the yachting profession

#128 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:12 PM

Yes, the winch loads (and I assume you refer to Sanya's winch bulkhead failure) would previously been fairly well-known (reliability analysis, winches had been pulling out of decks enough to know....), but the new 3Di sails, improved standing rigging, and improved lines may deliver more dynamic loading than had previously been the accepted norm. As you say, there are a lot of factors to take into account.

Thank you for realizing you can make your point without name-dropping or name-calling OE.....

#129 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:19 PM

Being a data-collection junkie, if it was my 10-20million dollar yacht, I would have these things embedded all over it....

Posted Image


If it's good enough for the Swedish Navy and commercial wind turbine blades....

Posted Image

#130 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 07:27 PM

http://www.springerl...547m48410538t3/
old news?

#131 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 08 April 2012 - 08:22 PM

Being a data-collection junkie, if it was my 10-20million dollar yacht, I would have these things embedded all over it....

Posted Image


If it's good enough for the Swedish Navy and commercial wind turbine blades....

Posted Image


Heriberto, No VO70 costs 10-20 million. Huh?

The first I know of FBG being used extensively in many yacht structures was the Nippon challenge. Probably it was not the first application. It has been around the AC for rigging, mast, boom, rudder, keel, hull, mast frame data collection (along with all kids of rigging loads, line loads, etc.) for a long long time.

I know it has been used in IMOCA boats, and though I have not read specific papers for VO70's on the topic (which is certainly a noteworthy omission) I do not know why it is assumed the data does not exist. On the face of it, it is harder to prove the non existence of such data, than contemplate its presence in some server(s) in the field of yacht engineering. Even more so because I do know that when Mean Machine started a VO70v2 program, the first thing they did was get a v1 boat, paint it, put sensors all over it, and go sailing.

Merf, can you offer your insight into strain data collection?

OSE, I have due respect for your statements, but can't understand the anonymity you choose given what you have written.

#132 Clovis

Clovis

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 321 posts
  • Location:Ici

Posted 08 April 2012 - 09:20 PM

Merf, can you offer your insight into strain data collection?

That would be great... i love this thread and the insights that you, Merf, Chimp/WOD (when not too angry! ;)), Clarke and others are giving...

OSE, I have due respect for your statements, but can't understand the anonymity you choose given what you have written.

I don't know much about yacht or F1 design and structure engineering (hence my curiosity to learn from those who really know), but i can smell fish... and some of the posters here write in a similarly strange fashion (OSE, yachtdynamics, starchallenge) without ever saying something really specific and clear... but maybe it's just me being too thick.

C.

#133 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 10:04 PM

i can safely say clovis, that i am very much part of my industry, and the reasons for my anonymity is simple, i, and other F1 teams have been asked in the past to get involved with the americas cup and volvo, the reason we dont is time, resources and money, and also in truth, there are only are only a few teams in the world of sailing that would actually benefit from our input currently, we charge alot, and expect full control and its not something we do lightly, so when it happens, and one day i am positive it will, l it will be a long process. my job, is in part to find new techniques and people, we source what we do, to a degree that is beyond the marine industry, and disclosing myself would allow the marine professionals to be named, that is something that my industry does very well, and that is to keep things quiet, so my only reasoning behind my "homework" to this site, is to see what public thought is, we do the same in F1, some of the greatest innovations come from a mans shed, not the lab. people like Mr Owen and Mr Clark, are the experts in their field as many others are, we, I, are mearly here to observe in the current state and find out if in part its worth it, we do this with many other sports. i am sure you yourself have my ideas, and these sites exist in every sport as do everyone that posts threads, and many sports that are technically challenging share data and information, cycling, works with motorsport, and they have only but a few comparisons. just because people dont talk about it does not mean it is not happening. we observe, why, because we want to learn. there is a reason why companies like Future Fibres have our business.

#134 Clovis

Clovis

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 321 posts
  • Location:Ici

Posted 08 April 2012 - 10:14 PM

Alright OSE, i found it strange that a f1 expert would end up on this site (out of curiosity how did u find this thread?)... glad to know we're here for the same reason: learn more! :)

#135 outsideengineer

outsideengineer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Location:uk
  • Interests:none

Posted 08 April 2012 - 10:34 PM

Alright OSE, i found it strange that a f1 expert would end up on this site (out of curiosity how did u find this thread?)... glad to know we're here for the same reason: learn more! :)


the site was mentioned in an interview done by your editor, with Grant Dalton, i believe after reading most of the threads this was originally based on his thoughts, although after reading what is mostly abuse, it probably should be re-thought,, because it took a long time to get any real information from people who are interested in the actual process, you dont have to be a field expert in yacht racing to be involved, i think you would find it very strange some of the research done by F1 teams, and to clarify, its not just F1, we are engineers, we share common goals.




#136 shanghaisailor

shanghaisailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 482 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 03:13 AM

Some really great posts and insites. I would say I am not an engineer but a sailor of 40 years.

Yes shock loads to rigs have increased dramatically. I remember when pre-stretched lines were almost a novelty and nowadays dyneema et al is the norm.

I also remember when sails stretched, firstly at the stitch holes and now with 3Di they are almost as rigid (comparitively) as an aircraft wing.

I am also a boat owner - owned far too many of them, the more high tech, the more testing, the greater the cost. My earlier boats were wood, the later ones GRP and my current is composite sandwich.

Boat building techniques have gone down the route of stonger/lighter through solid layup to sandwich, into 'exotic' materials, hand layup, to machines to pre-preg to vaccum infusion.

Could it be that we have gone too far in the resin weight saving game? because it strikes me that if you use enough of the right 'glue' things don't come unstuck (delaminate.

I stress I am not having a pop at anyone, it is something I have been curious about for a long time and as we have what appear to be some very competent and knowledgable engineers in this thread perhaps we might get some reaosnable answers.

The only point i would make in defence of the boats - as a boat owner and a sailor - is that the VOR is 'small' this time round becasue of financial constraints. How much would this level of testing of sgtructures add to a typical Volvo campaign ans would such research costs have reduced the fleet further.

Also I would ask the engineers - surely any structure can be broken.

When I was much younger I was out in some V. severe weather on a Royal navy Ship - (the local land based weather centre was recording 88kts of wind) and in places the waves bent steel.

If there are laid down design parameters in a design rule surely designers push to the limit of that rule, if there is a boat floting on the water, surely the sailors will push to the limit of the design. How do engineers factor in competitive human nature or adrenalin into the mix? Or the vagaries of Mother Nature.

I am sure it is possible, I just don't know how.

Great thread, so much better than some of the "show us your t***" rubbish that the low-brows post but that is probably why the site is called Sailing Anarchy after all :-)

See ya on the water

Shanghai Sailor

#137 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 09 April 2012 - 03:20 AM


Being a data-collection junkie, if it was my 10-20million dollar yacht, I would have these things embedded all over it....

Posted Image


If it's good enough for the Swedish Navy and commercial wind turbine blades....

Posted Image


Heriberto, No VO70 costs 10-20 million. Huh?

The first I know of FBG being used extensively in many yacht structures was the Nippon challenge. Probably it was not the first application. It has been around the AC for rigging, mast, boom, rudder, keel, hull, mast frame data collection (along with all kids of rigging loads, line loads, etc.) for a long long time.

I know it has been used in IMOCA boats, and though I have not read specific papers for VO70's on the topic (which is certainly a noteworthy omission) I do not know why it is assumed the data does not exist. On the face of it, it is harder to prove the non existence of such data, than contemplate its presence in some server(s) in the field of yacht engineering. Even more so because I do know that when Mean Machine started a VO70v2 program, the first thing they did was get a v1 boat, paint it, put sensors all over it, and go sailing.

Merf, can you offer your insight into strain data collection?

OSE, I have due respect for your statements, but can't understand the anonymity you choose given what you have written.


Regarding my boat cost, that was what Clean said and I plead for mercy quoting him. Please correct because I would really like to know how much they cost! Do tell!

Regarding sensors, I think you are right about proving a negative. I was taking outside engineer at his word. Are the current Volvo boats loaded with sensors and dataloggers to determine local temperature, strain, acceleration, deformation? Please share!

#138 Ballast Technician

Ballast Technician

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 04:31 AM


Merf, can you offer your insight into strain data collection?

That would be great... i love this thread and the insights that you, Merf, Chimp/WOD (when not too angry! ;)), Clarke and others are giving...

OSE, I have due respect for your statements, but can't understand the anonymity you choose given what you have written.

I don't know much about yacht or F1 design and structure engineering (hence my curiosity to learn from those who really know), but i can smell fish... and some of the posters here write in a similarly strange fashion (OSE, yachtdynamics, starchallenge) without ever saying something really specific and clear... but maybe it's just me being too thick.

C.


Indeed, I sense the impending the addition of another troll and affiliated sock puppet(s) to the ignore list...

#139 crashdog

crashdog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 177 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 07:42 AM

fly by wire.

Thats what we need. We need a boatload of information, derived from destructive laboratory testing. Then we need to fill up the boat with a pile of sensors. And do real time analysis of all that sensor info. And if the sensor data indicates criticality, the boat adjusts the sailors input in order to sail better. I am just not quite sure how the mainsheet/reef line gets connected to the computer connected to the joystick...

However, I actually think a sub scenario of this is possible now. The sensor data could provide information as to the criticality of loads in the structure of the boat and it could inform a sailor's decisions about how much to push the boat. Outsideengineer told us how drivers respond to technical limits in racing. Sailors should be doing the same thing. We kind of do already, but it is idiosyncratic, based on experience. A Finn sailor becomes very tolerant of big wind, which can have boat destroying effects in other classes. And you know Finn sailors. Affable lunkheads. Who like surfing down the waves in big air.

#140 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:07 AM

It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

#141 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:25 AM

It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?

#142 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:33 AM

i can safely say clovis, that i am very much part of my industry, and the reasons for my anonymity is simple, i, and other F1 teams have been asked in the past to get involved with the americas cup and volvo, the reason we dont is time, resources and money, and also in truth, there are only are only a few teams in the world of sailing that would actually benefit from our input currently, we charge alot, and expect full control and its not something we do lightly, so when it happens, and one day i am positive it will, l it will be a long process. my job, is in part to find new techniques and people, we source what we do, to a degree that is beyond the marine industry, and disclosing myself would allow the marine professionals to be named, that is something that my industry does very well, and that is to keep things quiet, so my only reasoning behind my "homework" to this site, is to see what public thought is, we do the same in F1, some of the greatest innovations come from a mans shed, not the lab. people like Mr Owen and Mr Clark, are the experts in their field as many others are, we, I, are mearly here to observe in the current state and find out if in part its worth it, we do this with many other sports. i am sure you yourself have my ideas, and these sites exist in every sport as do everyone that posts threads, and many sports that are technically challenging share data and information, cycling, works with motorsport, and they have only but a few comparisons. just because people dont talk about it does not mean it is not happening. we observe, why, because we want to learn. there is a reason why companies like Future Fibres have our business.

I was the one commenting on your anonymity, whether Clovis quoted me or not. I find your explanation just fine, except for outing FF right at the end. Not very consistent.

Do you demand therefore full control over any of FF's products, as you suggest is your norm? If so, which one(s)? That is a perhaps a two edged sword in this particular race, where FF's reputation has not been enhanced by events.

#143 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:15 AM


It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?


Correct on the ultrasound . They should be using thermal imaging and sheerography. Ultrasound will only show delam of laminates ,Thermal imaging will show delamination area and core failure. Sheerography will do the same as Thermal imaging but show the failed core. The Ultasound unit they use is an Epoch 4 old technology .They are using it as a thickness gauge with waveform not a flaw detector which is a different ball game. As to comparing technology to F1 is ridiculous. F1 use aerospace technology. Sailing technology is playing catch up. They should be using wet lay up carbon honeycomb core in the hull . Foam ? Dont make me laugh please. Autoclaved hull! What makes me laugh is when they do repairs shorside ,wet lay up on pre preg. Resin infusion is the way to go then autoclave . Good luck to all the teams .As to failures ,its best to use ultrasound and thermal imaging to cross reference if they are serious.

#144 moody frog

moody frog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Location:Brittany

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:38 AM



It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?


Correct on the ultrasound . They should be using thermal imaging and sheerography. Ultrasound will only show delam of laminates ,Thermal imaging will show delamination area and core failure. Sheerography will do the same as Thermal imaging but show the failed core. The Ultasound unit they use is an Epoch 4 old technology .They are using it as a thickness gauge with waveform not a flaw detector which is a different ball game. As to comparing technology to F1 is ridiculous. F1 use aerospace technology. Sailing technology is playing catch up. They should be using wet lay up carbon honeycomb core in the hull . Foam ? Dont make me laugh please. Autoclaved hull! What makes me laugh is when they do repairs shorside ,wet lay up on pre preg. Resin infusion is the way to go then autoclave . Good luck to all the teams .As to failures ,its best to use ultrasound and thermal imaging to cross reference if they are serious.


+ 1 on the ultrasound being not enough for the reasons your state + its unability to get any result in some "transition" areas.
By the way ;) well spotted regarding the Epoch 4, did too !
There are 1 or 2 other technologies of potential interest besides shearography and thermal imaging (not too easy on a stop/over that one).
All are ready available within the yacht racing community.

Now part of the problem is the time available at stop-overs v/s the time needed for a comprehensive enough inspection with the best technologies.
It would more or less force each team to employ their own NDT contractors, one for the whole fleet is just not possible. I would reckon a minimum of 2 working days/boat for a thorough inspection !

#145 YaraI56

YaraI56

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Yacht design, stability, cruising

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:38 AM

Back to the original post- it was a plea for more seaworthy designs. Any old salt can tell you that scaled-up racing dinghys are not particularly seaworthy. Overhangs and flared bows were not done for aethetics. Somehow the design rules need to be changed to incorporate the ability to handle heavy weather without slamming and diving through the waves, and without boats being pooped and helmsmen flung across the deck along with their wheels and binnacles.

Then there is the obvious fact that if you have naked vertical rudders and straight up and down keels, any contact with a UFO is likely to do damage.

Add another new variable. When you combine deep narrow keels with heavy ballast bobs on the end, with flat hulls geared for form stability, then add a beam sea, you have the mass stability fighting the form stability. Add another stress; those deep, narrow keel structures are going to flex, and if you happen to hit a beam seaway with just the right frequency, you might end up with a resonance effect. Certainly anyway, a lot of reversing stresses and fatigue.

No matter how fancy your calculation algorithms, the sea can produce an infinite number of loadings, and IMHO design rules should push for basic seaworthy shape, not just the highest speed in good conditions.

#146 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:45 AM



It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?


Correct on the ultrasound . They should be using thermal imaging and sheerography. Ultrasound will only show delam of laminates ,Thermal imaging will show delamination area and core failure. Sheerography will do the same as Thermal imaging but show the failed core. The Ultasound unit they use is an Epoch 4 old technology .They are using it as a thickness gauge with waveform not a flaw detector which is a different ball game. As to comparing technology to F1 is ridiculous. F1 use aerospace technology. Sailing technology is playing catch up. They should be using wet lay up carbon honeycomb core in the hull . Foam ? Dont make me laugh please. Autoclaved hull! What makes me laugh is when they do repairs shorside ,wet lay up on pre preg. Resin infusion is the way to go then autoclave . Good luck to all the teams .As to failures ,its best to use ultrasound and thermal imaging to cross reference if they are serious.


NDT: What I have heard from NDT specialists, no pun intended, was that sonic/resonance testing similar to this: is needed to control the interior of honeycomb cores. If this link is valid, thermal imaging will show you that something has gotten into the core, not that the cell walls are damaged. Care to explain what sheerography is?

F1: I will not claim that yachts use F1 technology. Nor does the industry try to catch up, instead using trickle down. Merf pointed out already the difference in economics between aerospace, F1, and boat building. Chalk and cheese. Foam has its place in boat building, IMHO, laugh if you wish.

#147 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:49 AM

... well spotted regarding the Epoch 4, did too !


MF, did you spot this in the stopover films, or the photo from Cape Horn? In Cape Horn it was being operated by a member of the shore crew for Tele, not by Qi. Just for clarity.

#148 moody frog

moody frog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Location:Brittany

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:59 AM




It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?


Correct on the ultrasound . They should be using thermal imaging and sheerography. Ultrasound will only show delam of laminates ,Thermal imaging will show delamination area and core failure. Sheerography will do the same as Thermal imaging but show the failed core. The Ultasound unit they use is an Epoch 4 old technology .They are using it as a thickness gauge with waveform not a flaw detector which is a different ball game. As to comparing technology to F1 is ridiculous. F1 use aerospace technology. Sailing technology is playing catch up. They should be using wet lay up carbon honeycomb core in the hull . Foam ? Dont make me laugh please. Autoclaved hull! What makes me laugh is when they do repairs shorside ,wet lay up on pre preg. Resin infusion is the way to go then autoclave . Good luck to all the teams .As to failures ,its best to use ultrasound and thermal imaging to cross reference if they are serious.


NDT: What I have heard from NDT specialists, no pun intended, was that sonic/resonance testing similar to this: is needed to control the interior of honeycomb cores. If this link is valid, thermal imaging will show you that something has gotten into the core, not that the cell walls are damaged. Care to explain what sheerography is?

F1: I will not claim that yachts use F1 technology. Nor does the industry try to catch up, instead using trickle down. Merf pointed out already the difference in economics between aerospace, F1, and boat building. Chalk and cheese. Foam has its place in boat building, IMHO, laugh if you wish.


Wikipedia
Doug, this technology is very-much recognized. It is well known, but -to my knowledge - has limited availability - I only know of one UK company operating with it in the marine field and yet they are pure equipment + operator suppliers, I.e, inspection scope has to be given to them and interpretation made later (not a full service like QI and others)
Cost of the equipment is probably the reason of this.
It is bound to change, though, as for every technological equipment

#149 moody frog

moody frog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Location:Brittany

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:02 AM


... well spotted regarding the Epoch 4, did too !


MF, did you spot this in the stopover films, or the photo from Cape Horn? In Cape Horn it was being operated by a member of the shore crew for Tele, not by Qi. Just for clarity.


Cape-Horn for myself.
Was just noticing that Carboninit had "a good eye"

#150 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 11:11 AM




It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?


Correct on the ultrasound . They should be using thermal imaging and sheerography. Ultrasound will only show delam of laminates ,Thermal imaging will show delamination area and core failure. Sheerography will do the same as Thermal imaging but show the failed core. The Ultasound unit they use is an Epoch 4 old technology .They are using it as a thickness gauge with waveform not a flaw detector which is a different ball game. As to comparing technology to F1 is ridiculous. F1 use aerospace technology. Sailing technology is playing catch up. They should be using wet lay up carbon honeycomb core in the hull . Foam ? Dont make me laugh please. Autoclaved hull! What makes me laugh is when they do repairs shorside ,wet lay up on pre preg. Resin infusion is the way to go then autoclave . Good luck to all the teams .As to failures ,its best to use ultrasound and thermal imaging to cross reference if they are serious.


NDT: What I have heard from NDT specialists, no pun intended, was that sonic/resonance testing similar to this: is needed to control the interior of honeycomb cores. If this link is valid, thermal imaging will show you that something has gotten into the core, not that the cell walls are damaged. Care to explain what sheerography is?

F1: I will not claim that yachts use F1 technology. Nor does the industry try to catch up, instead using trickle down. Merf pointed out already the difference in economics between aerospace, F1, and boat building. Chalk and cheese. Foam has its place in boat building, IMHO, laugh if you wish.


Linky Sheerography http://www.dantecdyn...ult.aspx?ID=665
The problem with Sheerography its really exspensive to buy at the moment . There are plans to make it into a handheld unit. I know there is a company in the US who have a product that you can see the core through the laminates .Its used to inspect wings on aircraft. To have one person inspecting the whole fleet is ridiculous. Each team should employ a NDT surveyor using thermal imaging and ultrasound . Using ultrasound on its own is not enough. Thermal imaging will show you what is happening then you can find out how deep the fracture is with ultrasound. Cross referencing is the way to go.Only using ultrasound you are blind when inspecting .Its dark down there.

Here is the other link if they want to look at the core http://www.imperiumi...os-videos.shtml

#151 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 09 April 2012 - 11:36 AM

Not to bore everyone on the subject, but I actually think we would know if any of the teams had an extensive performance monitoring instrumentation program, because it would be an integral part of the team program from the start. The reasons I would find it valuable are pretty much the same reasons that I would find it valuable in any other critical structure/project. From this brief paper by W. Allen Marr:


Table 1: Reasons to Use Geotechnical Instruments
Indicate impending failure
Provide a warning
Reveal unknowns
Evaluate critical design assumptions
Assess contractor’s means and methods
Minimize damage to adjacent structures
Control construction
Control operations
Provide data to help select remedial methods to fix problems
Document performance for assessing damages
Inform stakeholders
Satisfy regulators
Reduce litigation
Advance state-of-knowledge


The similarities are obvious (maybe only two or three at most that aren't directly applicable), but also, the reasons for resistance to a comprehensive performance monitoring/instrumentation program are similar across engineering venues, i.e. lack of knowledge of risk cost reduction, cost of implementation, complexity of implementation, lack of specialized knowledge/staff. Doing something like this isn't an add-on, it needs to be integrated in the philosophy of the team from the outset, and yes, it costs money. However, if you look at the risk cost reduction, it could ultimately save money. For example, multiply the risk probablility of breaking a rig times the cost incurred (shipping, repair, loss of advertising). So now you have an idea how much you can budget to monitor and reduce the risk. If you reduce the risk probablility by a certain amount, you can then quantify the risk cost reduction.

So why is this important to an improved VOR70 yacht design? Well, for all of the reasons above starting from the top through reducing litigation and finally advancing the state-of-knowledge! Frankly, if they include anything in the next rule, a one-design performance monitoring implementation may be a very good way to go. I think someone mentioned this would quite likely be of benefit to Volvo....

#152 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 01:04 PM


It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?

Doug,
Sorry, got busy. Also sorry that I over simplified things (NDT method used). Yes, I am refering to Stefano Beltrando from QI. I agree 100% with you. I love listening to his verbal reports and views. He tells you a lot more than you can ever have hoped for from a guy with an ulrasounder and a tube of hair gel! I was talking to him a couple of weeks ago and understand that he has been contracted by the teams (all of them I think), but not by Volvo themselves. I think this is understandable, but he simply had to priorities in Auckland, and he didn't have time to get around to all of his clients. One of the downsides to a short stopover. You could get more people in, but I would want Stefano's opinion, not someone elses.
I agree that ultrasound isn't going to work with core sheer failure, it is only going to cope with the individual skins. I think he uses thermal imaging as well. I know for sure he can spot core sheer failure with both nomex and foam, as I have worked with him in the past when he has spotted it before it developed too far, and before the team were aware of it. Luckily it got fixed before it became a problem.

#153 narecet

narecet

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,221 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 01:35 PM


i can safely say clovis, that i am very much part of my industry, and the reasons for my anonymity is simple, i, and other F1 teams have been asked in the past to get involved with the americas cup and volvo, the reason we dont is time, resources and money, and also in truth, there are only are only a few teams in the world of sailing that would actually benefit from our input currently, we charge alot, and expect full control and its not something we do lightly, so when it happens, and one day i am positive it will, l it will be a long process. my job, is in part to find new techniques and people, we source what we do, to a degree that is beyond the marine industry, and disclosing myself would allow the marine professionals to be named, that is something that my industry does very well, and that is to keep things quiet, so my only reasoning behind my "homework" to this site, is to see what public thought is, we do the same in F1, some of the greatest innovations come from a mans shed, not the lab. people like Mr Owen and Mr Clark, are the experts in their field as many others are, we, I, are mearly here to observe in the current state and find out if in part its worth it, we do this with many other sports. i am sure you yourself have my ideas, and these sites exist in every sport as do everyone that posts threads, and many sports that are technically challenging share data and information, cycling, works with motorsport, and they have only but a few comparisons. just because people dont talk about it does not mean it is not happening. we observe, why, because we want to learn. there is a reason why companies like Future Fibres have our business.

I was the one commenting on your anonymity, whether Clovis quoted me or not. I find your explanation just fine, except for outing FF right at the end. Not very consistent.

Do you demand therefore full control over any of FF's products, as you suggest is your norm? If so, which one(s)? That is a perhaps a two edged sword in this particular race, where FF's reputation has not been enhanced by events.


That last one is a strange expression as well. Maybe it's just me, but as a consultant, I've never myself referred to a client as having my business, or known other consultants to put it that way. Rather, we have their business, they are paying!

But we will see from following posts.

EDIT: What is it? First you write "i, and other F1 teams," which implies you work for an F1 team.

And you say that you are looking for information on yacht racing, as that isn't your field, F1 is your field, and so you're coming to SA to gauge the situation in sailing. But then you say that Future Fibres "have our business."

#154 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 03:40 PM

I expect that Future Fibres are making the retaing strops for the wheels on F1 in PBO when they prang the car.

#155 Pierre S

Pierre S

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 68 posts
  • Location:60 Norff

Posted 09 April 2012 - 03:55 PM

I seem to remember reading that Groupama do their own ultrasound testing on this race and don't use Stefano Beltrando/QI.

#156 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 04:11 PM



It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?

Doug,
Sorry, got busy. Also sorry that I over simplified things (NDT method used). Yes, I am refering to Stefano Beltrando from QI. I agree 100% with you. I love listening to his verbal reports and views. He tells you a lot more than you can ever have hoped for from a guy with an ulrasounder and a tube of hair gel! I was talking to him a couple of weeks ago and understand that he has been contracted by the teams (all of them I think), but not by Volvo themselves. I think this is understandable, but he simply had to priorities in Auckland, and he didn't have time to get around to all of his clients. One of the downsides to a short stopover. You could get more people in, but I would want Stefano's opinion, not someone elses.
I agree that ultrasound isn't going to work with core sheer failure, it is only going to cope with the individual skins. I think he uses thermal imaging as well. I know for sure he can spot core sheer failure with both nomex and foam, as I have worked with him in the past when he has spotted it before it developed too far, and before the team were aware of it. Luckily it got fixed before it became a problem.


Plain English BULLSHIT in the volvo snippet, does he use C scan? NO, He uses thermal imaging ? what cameras? He can spot core failure and sheer ,NOT using A scan he can't. The teams arent aware of it because its looked at when in relaxed mode not loaded up. Every stop should allow for the boats to be maxed up and tested at sea before the starts.To say you would only want Stefano's opinion is Bullshit , there are companies and individuals with more experience and inspection tools at there disposal. As said before ,yachting is playing catch up and its a long way behind on the technology stakes.

#157 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 05:14 PM

Umm, to digress from the topic at hand (NDT, which I really know little about other than it's expensive), this discussion had a certain amount early on about cores vs. monolithic, and which types of cores were used in V70 and O60 builds. Thanks to Messrs. Schickler, Owen, et al. we know that some boats use foam, some use honeycomb, and some are monolithic in the forward areas. And that there are transition issues between different densities and types. There was some news a few years ago about some French builders lowering vacuum pressure (ok, sic) as they transitioned through Airex's danger temp zone to allow them to use a more resilient core with higher temp resin. And Gurit/SP has turned alot of builders on to Corecell for similar apps. And Mr. Clark made the interesting point that the glue sheets for honeycomb weigh more than the skins or core alone; and that absent a good bond all fails.

I guess that for weight savings and competitive reasons we are unlikely to see widespread re-adoption of monolithic construction in V70s unless they go 1design. Therefore a light yet solid core that can withstand the rigors of years of hard sailing (best way to boost fleet numbers is old boats recycled) is probably called for. Breaking bits and pieces is one thing but having to perform major hull surgery during short stopovers is perhaps not in the best interest of the sponsors or teams. Then it becomes a builders cup rather than a sailing race.

A good example of learning and moving on is how the class has absorbed the keel lessons of the first race. After the first leg there were widespread wails about what a failure the new 70s were, how badly Mr. Bourke had fucked up, and that no one would care about the outcome of a shippers' cup. Knock on wood, we have been spared those issues to date.

#158 Potter

Potter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,023 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 05:22 PM

I expect that Future Fibres are making the retaing strops for the wheels on F1 in PBO when they prang the car.

Spot on.

#159 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 06:53 AM




It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?

Doug,
Sorry, got busy. Also sorry that I over simplified things (NDT method used). Yes, I am refering to Stefano Beltrando from QI. I agree 100% with you. I love listening to his verbal reports and views. He tells you a lot more than you can ever have hoped for from a guy with an ulrasounder and a tube of hair gel! I was talking to him a couple of weeks ago and understand that he has been contracted by the teams (all of them I think), but not by Volvo themselves. I think this is understandable, but he simply had to priorities in Auckland, and he didn't have time to get around to all of his clients. One of the downsides to a short stopover. You could get more people in, but I would want Stefano's opinion, not someone elses.
I agree that ultrasound isn't going to work with core sheer failure, it is only going to cope with the individual skins. I think he uses thermal imaging as well. I know for sure he can spot core sheer failure with both nomex and foam, as I have worked with him in the past when he has spotted it before it developed too far, and before the team were aware of it. Luckily it got fixed before it became a problem.


Plain English BULLSHIT in the volvo snippet, does he use C scan? NO, He uses thermal imaging ? what cameras? He can spot core failure and sheer ,NOT using A scan he can't. The teams arent aware of it because its looked at when in relaxed mode not loaded up. Every stop should allow for the boats to be maxed up and tested at sea before the starts.To say you would only want Stefano's opinion is Bullshit , there are companies and individuals with more experience and inspection tools at there disposal. As said before ,yachting is playing catch up and its a long way behind on the technology stakes.

Carboninit, Not bullshit, just giving my opinion. All I know is that Stefano has pointed out core sheer failure using simple hand held devices on the boats in unloaded state (you can ask him whether it is C, A or FU scan yourself). Where he told us to look there was core sheer failure, so it worked. I have only worked with a handful of NDT guys and of those he impressed me the most when working in the field.
I don't disagree that yachting needs to learn from other industries, but 20 years ago Formula 1 and Aerospace where behind Yachting in some aspects (I saw what they were doing first hand). No question that they have overtaken, but there will always be a link and the rubber band will stretch and contract between sectors, that is simply nature.

#160 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 07:23 AM

Fair enough, thats what I like about SA ,out of all the conversations and threads something comes out of them good and bad. It will be intresting what will be implemented next time round that does not work .When they do get it right I suspect they will go for another design with problems .Nature of the beast.Happy sailing.

#161 mad

mad

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,072 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 03:30 PM



It is a shame that Stefano didn't have enough time to ultrasound the whole fleet in Auckland before Leg 5. I wonder what he might have picked up had he had the time/budget to do them all.

WYD,
this is inside baseball, but I am willing to play! Stefano is the "ultrasound technician" from QI composites in Italy, who can be seen in the background in many films and photos. He is more than a technician, it has to be said. While I do not have his CV at hand, he has a very large role in what his company does, taking responsibility etc. He has been at every stopover, and was in Chile as well. He is by far more qualified than I to comment on the state of quality control through non-destructive testing. That said, it is my understanding that flaws in honeycomb core materials cannot be seen by ultrasound, if that is the only technique being applied at stopovers.

You point to his time pressure in Auckland. I imagine it is very stressful, even more so if boats have made repairs and need those areas very closely checked, all very last minute. With exhaustion comes also errors. True at sea, true on land. Do you know if QI is under contract to VOR, or simply has a deal with each team separately?


Correct on the ultrasound . They should be using thermal imaging and sheerography. Ultrasound will only show delam of laminates ,Thermal imaging will show delamination area and core failure. Sheerography will do the same as Thermal imaging but show the failed core. The Ultasound unit they use is an Epoch 4 old technology .They are using it as a thickness gauge with waveform not a flaw detector which is a different ball game. As to comparing technology to F1 is ridiculous. F1 use aerospace technology. Sailing technology is playing catch up. They should be using wet lay up carbon honeycomb core in the hull . Foam ? Dont make me laugh please. Autoclaved hull! What makes me laugh is when they do repairs shorside ,wet lay up on pre preg. Resin infusion is the way to go then autoclave . Good luck to all the teams .As to failures ,its best to use ultrasound and thermal imaging to cross reference if they are serious.

Don't normally see "resin infusion" and "nomex" mentioned in the same post subject, are you suggesting they resin infuse the inner skin? :blink: or just a wet lay-up and bag? Why will wet lay-up rather than pre-preg produce a better result?

Not trolling, interested in your thoughts/views as to why.

#162 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 11 April 2012 - 05:41 PM

Hi Mad Wet lay up the core with carbon honeycomb core on female mould .
Have a look at the video http://www.parabeam....ssing_animation
You can get this in carbon with a top and bottom carbon veil. Its funky lightweigt shit to use and sets light and mega strong. Used in aircraft curved panels etc etc.
The problem with using prepreg is you get dry spots when layed up and if not handled correctly it will crystalise causing failure . Resin infusion you can see what is happening then autoclave if you want to .Thats the way to go a pure carbon Volvo 70 with pure carbon core.

#163 narecet

narecet

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,221 posts

Posted 11 April 2012 - 06:07 PM

Thank you!

#164 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 11 April 2012 - 06:25 PM

From the manufacture
3D glass fabric is woven out of 100% E-glass fiber, as well as carbon fibers, Kevlar fibers and other high-performance fibers. This structure consists of two decklayers formed by warp and weft direction fibers and Z direction fibers which interconnect both decklayers. The typical structure of vertical piles can be recognized by the 8-shaped piles in warp direction. Other shapes of vertical piles, such as I-shape and V- shape, can be realized too. The height between two decklayers (Z direction) can be designed from 2mm to 40mm in order to meet different needs.



When the fabric is impregnated with a thermoset resin, the fabric absorbs the resin and rises to the preset height. Owing to the integral structure, composites made of 3d glass fabric boast superior resistance against delamination to traditional honeycomb and foam cored materials.

They make what is required.Its brilliant to use.

#165 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 11 April 2012 - 08:53 PM

From the manufacture
3D glass fabric is woven out of 100% E-glass fiber, as well as carbon fibers, Kevlar fibers and other high-performance fibers. This structure consists of two decklayers formed by warp and weft direction fibers and Z direction fibers which interconnect both decklayers. The typical structure of vertical piles can be recognized by the 8-shaped piles in warp direction. Other shapes of vertical piles, such as I-shape and V- shape, can be realized too. The height between two decklayers (Z direction) can be designed from 2mm to 40mm in order to meet different needs.



When the fabric is impregnated with a thermoset resin, the fabric absorbs the resin and rises to the preset height. Owing to the integral structure, composites made of 3d glass fabric boast superior resistance against delamination to traditional honeycomb and foam cored materials.

They make what is required.Its brilliant to use.


Have you ever used for boat structure other than flat panels (bulkheads)? If so, please send pictures. I know it is used for aircraft non structural parts, and have heard in marine only for flats. This probably due to the requirement for two moulds for everything. When I looked at this material for use in a mini, the producer told me it was not suitable, and did not have the means to pass CE/ISO scrutiny for hull shell.

#166 Danno

Danno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 418 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 12:01 AM

From the mouth of JK.........

"Telefonica’s pit stop in Cape Horn was not a necessity but rather a very clever strategical decision based on having third place assured and a weather window to exploit"

Forgive me if i'm wrong, but no yacht racing will generally stop unless they need to? I'm fairly sure that the shots we saw of the Telefonica crew mid southern ocean covered in resin were a fairly good indication that the minor delam problem they had mid ocean was anything but "minor"
It strikes me as somewhat arrogant that he's making this call when 2 of his boats have required major work in this race (Telefonica and Groupama).

The only boat in this race that hasn't needed major hull work is Puma.............

#167 Terrafirma

Terrafirma

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,528 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 12:18 AM

From the mouth of JK.........

"Telefonica’s pit stop in Cape Horn was not a necessity but rather a very clever strategical decision based on having third place assured and a weather window to exploit"

Forgive me if i'm wrong, but no yacht racing will generally stop unless they need to? I'm fairly sure that the shots we saw of the Telefonica crew mid southern ocean covered in resin were a fairly good indication that the minor delam problem they had mid ocean was anything but "minor"
It strikes me as somewhat arrogant that he's making this call when 2 of his boats have required major work in this race (Telefonica and Groupama).

The only boat in this race that hasn't needed major hull work is Puma.............


You are misreading his comments Danno. TF did have to stop to undertake delam repairs and were very smart about it, choosing to stop where they did and take advantage of a weather window at the same time, smart play yes but I am sure they wouldn't off stopped had it not been a necesssity. JuanK is also using this opportunity as a press release.

#168 the paradox of thrift

the paradox of thrift

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,376 posts
  • Location:Mos-Vegas
  • Interests:I like sailing

Posted 12 April 2012 - 01:00 AM

From the mouth of JK.........

"Telefonica’s pit stop in Cape Horn was not a necessity but rather a very clever strategical decision based on having third place assured and a weather window to exploit"

Forgive me if i'm wrong, but no yacht racing will generally stop unless they need to? I'm fairly sure that the shots we saw of the Telefonica crew mid southern ocean covered in resin were a fairly good indication that the minor delam problem they had mid ocean was anything but "minor"
It strikes me as somewhat arrogant that he's making this call when 2 of his boats have required major work in this race (Telefonica and Groupama).

The only boat in this race that hasn't needed major hull work is Puma.............


I had to laugh when I saw that too. It is impressive that JK boats can suffer bow delamination but still continue racing. It is also convenient to redefine "continuing racing" to include meeting you shore crew in a remote Southern Ocean anchorage and then excuse that as a piece of "clever tactical decision making".

There would have been a lot of stress for the crews of Sanya, Camper, Abu Dhabi and Telefonica when they sustained damage of that nature so far from civilization.

#169 Offshore 1

Offshore 1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 207 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 05:09 AM

Fair enough, thats what I like about SA ,out of all the conversations and threads something comes out of them good and bad. It will be intresting what will be implemented next time round that does not work .When they do get it right I suspect they will go for another design with problems .Nature of the beast.Happy sailing.



Let's see, you trash a respected guy's reputation then follow with a post like that? Classy...You continue to spew forth all sorts of garbage and ill informed comments and I can't help but wonder if you have ever built a raceboat before? You are basically insinuating that all these builders don't know what they are doing(should have used veil on the core???) Again, your phone must be running hot with all those job offers as you seem to have all the answers...

#170 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,786 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 12 April 2012 - 05:23 AM

It strikes me as somewhat arrogant.......


"I’d beg not to generalize and avoid putting in the same basket the good work and brilliance of some engineers with that of others which are clearly not the same. "

Yes but only "somewhat" arrogant? Brilliance, no less.

#171 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 07:35 AM


Fair enough, thats what I like about SA ,out of all the conversations and threads something comes out of them good and bad. It will be intresting what will be implemented next time round that does not work .When they do get it right I suspect they will go for another design with problems .Nature of the beast.Happy sailing.



Let's see, you trash a respected guy's reputation then follow with a post like that? Classy...You continue to spew forth all sorts of garbage and ill informed comments and I can't help but wonder if you have ever built a raceboat before? You are basically insinuating that all these builders don't know what they are doing(should have used veil on the core???) Again, your phone must be running hot with all those job offers as you seem to have all the answers...


Yeah whatever.I am not trashing a reputation on a forum you prick. I have worked with him in the past. Simple fact is the boats are falling apart , why! Climb back in ya pram. Its called having a discussion on a forum.

#172 Offshore 1

Offshore 1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 207 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 08:13 AM



Fair enough, thats what I like about SA ,out of all the conversations and threads something comes out of them good and bad. It will be intresting what will be implemented next time round that does not work .When they do get it right I suspect they will go for another design with problems .Nature of the beast.Happy sailing.



Let's see, you trash a respected guy's reputation then follow with a post like that? Classy...You continue to spew forth all sorts of garbage and ill informed comments and I can't help but wonder if you have ever built a raceboat before? You are basically insinuating that all these builders don't know what they are doing(should have used veil on the core???) Again, your phone must be running hot with all those job offers as you seem to have all the answers...


Yeah whatever.I am not trashing a reputation on a forum you prick. I have worked with him in the past. Simple fact is the boats are falling apart , why! Climb back in ya pram. Its called having a discussion on a forum.



Sorry to interupt your "discussion", I'll let you get back to educating everyone on modern racing yacht engineering and construction

#173 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 09:41 AM




Fair enough, thats what I like about SA ,out of all the conversations and threads something comes out of them good and bad. It will be intresting what will be implemented next time round that does not work .When they do get it right I suspect they will go for another design with problems .Nature of the beast.Happy sailing.



Let's see, you trash a respected guy's reputation then follow with a post like that? Classy...You continue to spew forth all sorts of garbage and ill informed comments and I can't help but wonder if you have ever built a raceboat before? You are basically insinuating that all these builders don't know what they are doing(should have used veil on the core???) Again, your phone must be running hot with all those job offers as you seem to have all the answers...


Yeah whatever.I am not trashing a reputation on a forum you prick. I have worked with him in the past. Simple fact is the boats are falling apart , why! Climb back in ya pram. Its called having a discussion on a forum.



Sorry to interupt your "discussion", I'll let you get back to educating everyone on modern racing yacht engineering and construction


Sarcasm now,nice .I can go one better than that , WANKER ,PRICK, FUCKWITT, TOSSER, LOOSER,IDIOT,ASSHOLE ,MORON, SHITBAG, anything else youd like to call me ,BRING IT ON. Love it .

#174 mad

mad

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,072 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 01:49 PM

From the manufacture
3D glass fabric is woven out of 100% E-glass fiber, as well as carbon fibers, Kevlar fibers and other high-performance fibers. This structure consists of two decklayers formed by warp and weft direction fibers and Z direction fibers which interconnect both decklayers. The typical structure of vertical piles can be recognized by the 8-shaped piles in warp direction. Other shapes of vertical piles, such as I-shape and V- shape, can be realized too. The height between two decklayers (Z direction) can be designed from 2mm to 40mm in order to meet different needs.



When the fabric is impregnated with a thermoset resin, the fabric absorbs the resin and rises to the preset height. Owing to the integral structure, composites made of 3d glass fabric boast superior resistance against delamination to traditional honeycomb and foam cored materials.

They make what is required.Its brilliant to use.

No data sheets or specs on the website make me very suspicious of that material. Would want to see some real evaluation on that before ever using it. Any figures for fibre volume, resin consumption? As for wet lay-up?? no thanks.

Oh yeah, How do you get dry spots in a pre-preg material?

#175 s2 alter ego

s2 alter ego

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 03:39 PM

The height between two decklayers (Z direction) can be designed from 2mm to 40mm in order to meet different needs.
When the fabric is impregnated with a thermoset resin, the fabric absorbs the resin and rises to the preset height.

And thickness is limited to 40mm because of ?
fabric would not absorb resin completely if thicker ?
fibers in Z-direction would buckle if any thicker ?

The least optimum shape of a cross section towards buckling is circular solid rod used in z-direction in that product. Compare that with hexagonal honeycomb of small cell size giving much better stiffnes to resist buckling of the core material under compression loads across the skins. Does panels made out of that stuff change their thickness under loads elastically upto some limit and heat up under regular slamming loads while absorbing energy (they are not perfect springs) ?
Seems to me that product can have merit only on smaller scale, when corebonding is significant weight addition compared to total weight of the panel and the producer knows that, hence limiting it to 40mm max thickness. Using 2 40mm thick products to replace 80mm alternative core material places extra material at the center plane where it's the least useful.

Owing to the integral structure, composites made of 3d glass fabric boast superior resistance against delamination to traditional honeycomb and foam cored materials.

Core debonding rather than delamination.

No data sheets or specs on the website make me very suspicious of that material. Would want to see some real evaluation on that before ever using it. Any figures for fibre volume, resin consumption? As for wet lay-up?? no thanks.

There was a statement on that in the video. 50%/50%, by weight if I remember correctly. ( no guarantee that I do )
It seems that material might have merit in non weight optimised structures, when constracted by workers who can't make traditional core bonding correctly reliably.
Assuming it doesn't cost too much for that but it propably does.

Oh yeah, How do you get dry spots in a pre-preg material?

In theory by heating it without necessary control of rates of temperature increase the resin can flow out into the honeycomb core resulting dry spots in the inner laminate if there is nothing to stop that from happening. In other words, prepreg & honeycombs are not suitable materials for amateurs who don't know what they are doing.

#176 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 03:42 PM

Offshore 1 ,It's not worth it ! Leave the ground to the trolls , everybody has

#177 mad

mad

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,072 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 04:02 PM


The height between two decklayers (Z direction) can be designed from 2mm to 40mm in order to meet different needs.
When the fabric is impregnated with a thermoset resin, the fabric absorbs the resin and rises to the preset height.

And thickness is limited to 40mm because of ?
fabric would not absorb resin completely if thicker ?
fibers in Z-direction would buckle if any thicker ?

The least optimum shape of a cross section towards buckling is circular solid rod used in z-direction in that product. Compare that with hexagonal honeycomb of small cell size giving much better stiffnes to resist buckling of the core material under compression loads across the skins. Does panels made out of that stuff change their thickness under loads elastically upto some limit and heat up under regular slamming loads while absorbing energy (they are not perfect springs) ?
Seems to me that product can have merit only on smaller scale, when corebonding is significant weight addition compared to total weight of the panel and the producer knows that, hence limiting it to 40mm max thickness. Using 2 40mm thick products to replace 80mm alternative core material places extra material at the center plane where it's the least useful.

Owing to the integral structure, composites made of 3d glass fabric boast superior resistance against delamination to traditional honeycomb and foam cored materials.

Core debonding rather than delamination.

No data sheets or specs on the website make me very suspicious of that material. Would want to see some real evaluation on that before ever using it. Any figures for fibre volume, resin consumption? As for wet lay-up?? no thanks.

There was a statement on that in the video. 50%/50%, by weight if I remember correctly. ( no guarantee that I do )
It seems that material might have merit in non weight optimised structures, when constracted by workers who can't make traditional core bonding correctly reliably.
Assuming it doesn't cost too much for that but it propably does.

Oh yeah, How do you get dry spots in a pre-preg material?

In theory by heating it without necessary control of rates of temperature increase the resin can flow out into the honeycomb core resulting dry spots in the inner laminate if there is nothing to stop that from happening. In other words, prepreg & honeycombs are not suitable materials for amateurs who don't know what they are doing.

So not really a dry spot, just shitty processing then. Would still like to see some real data sheets and hear some comments from qualified engineers. Its been around for a while and if (Big if) it's that good, everyone would be using it, but they're not.

#178 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 12:38 AM

Anybody tried nano foam core?

#179 SeanM

SeanM

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 08:12 AM

Anybody tried nano foam core?

or Graphene?? soon to come ;)

#180 tekwa

tekwa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 85 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:14 AM


Anybody tried nano foam core?

or Graphene?? soon to come ;)



Problem is a) core to skin bonding
b )price
c ) sailors will smash anythig


isnt it?

#181 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 07:06 PM

I earlier posted a link to an article that claimed that tougher core was useful when sheer loads were too high for a core's sheer strength. But, yes, tougher core wouldn't solve delam unless the delam was from slamming and the top layer of core separated, then it might help. Alot of delams I have seen have been in the top mil. where you can still see foam adhered to the skin. I have also seen this in grounding where the skin looks to have been peeled or torn from the core, again with the glue line intact. One question about bonding different densities side by side, maybe a long scarfe would reduce flexural differences there? Increased complexity though could be NC-ed. Graphene is an interesting material, highly conductive so could lend itself to sensors. Hall is using a nano resin, I believe, in the J111 spars.

#182 YaraI56

YaraI56

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Yacht design, stability, cruising

Posted 16 April 2012 - 02:26 AM

It is interesting how this discussion has focussed on detail design instead of the premise which opened the discussion: The overall design parameters need to be changed to ensure greater seaworthiness and crew safety.

Take a look at just one little rule-

"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?

Then there are rules regarding minimum curvature in hull design. Curvature= strength, less slamming, lower surface loads due to diversion of the flow more towards a tangent. Why limit the curvature?

#183 Left Hook

Left Hook

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,330 posts

Posted 16 April 2012 - 03:06 AM

"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?


Have you seen the amount of water which comes over the deck of these boats and winds up in the cockpit?

#184 YaraI56

YaraI56

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Location:Sydney Australia
  • Interests:Yacht design, stability, cruising

Posted 16 April 2012 - 03:38 AM


"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?


Have you seen the amount of water which comes over the deck of these boats and winds up in the cockpit?


It is perfectly possible to have adequate cockpit drains without an open stern. Back to the first post on this thread, the author was recommending flair in the bow sections to make the boats less of a submarine, and reduce the stress on the crew.

#185 CrushDigital

CrushDigital

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,841 posts
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 16 April 2012 - 05:24 AM



"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?


Have you seen the amount of water which comes over the deck of these boats and winds up in the cockpit?


It is perfectly possible to have adequate cockpit drains without an open stern. Back to the first post on this thread, the author was recommending flair in the bow sections to make the boats less of a submarine, and reduce the stress on the crew.


Please explain the logic that you've employed to determine that an open cockpit is any less safe than one that is closed at the back.

I've sailed on plenty of both types of design and I just can't foresee how the open transom is worse. In fact, during those hectic moments it's always felt like the cockpits that are closed off in the back are just getting in the way.

Furthermore, I think you're really underestimating the amount of green water over the decks in big seas when you're moving at 25kts. With all this talk of crew comfort and safety, I can't imagine those guys buying into the idea of having to stand in a few feet of cold water for half the race. Hell with the amount of water that would be sitting in the cockpit, free surface effect could become a concern (please note the final point on free surface effect was firmly tongue in cheek)

#186 the paradox of thrift

the paradox of thrift

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,376 posts
  • Location:Mos-Vegas
  • Interests:I like sailing

Posted 16 April 2012 - 06:55 AM


"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?


Have you seen the amount of water which comes over the deck of these boats and winds up in the cockpit?


Yep. On a blue water race boat give me a open cockpit any day of the week.

#187 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:48 AM




"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?


Have you seen the amount of water which comes over the deck of these boats and winds up in the cockpit?


It is perfectly possible to have adequate cockpit drains without an open stern. Back to the first post on this thread, the author was recommending flair in the bow sections to make the boats less of a submarine, and reduce the stress on the crew.


Please explain the logic that you've employed to determine that an open cockpit is any less safe than one that is closed at the back.

I've sailed on plenty of both types of design and I just can't foresee how the open transom is worse. In fact, during those hectic moments it's always felt like the cockpits that are closed off in the back are just getting in the way.

Furthermore, I think you're really underestimating the amount of green water over the decks in big seas when you're moving at 25kts. With all this talk of crew comfort and safety, I can't imagine those guys buying into the idea of having to stand in a few feet of cold water for half the race. Hell with the amount of water that would be sitting in the cockpit, free surface effect could become a concern (please note the final point on free surface effect was firmly tongue in cheek)


Forget the crew's feeting getting wet, they are in super cold conditions transom or not. It is the weight of water, probably 2 to 3 tonnes of it minimum, which will be in the boat, and loading the boat when they go off the next wave and crash into it's flat back. Open transom is a requirement because it is safer. No VO70 gets "pooped" outrun but a wave that crashes into the cockpit from astern. That is a mindset from IOR days.

#188 moody frog

moody frog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Location:Brittany

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:06 AM





"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?


Have you seen the amount of water which comes over the deck of these boats and winds up in the cockpit?


It is perfectly possible to have adequate cockpit drains without an open stern. Back to the first post on this thread, the author was recommending flair in the bow sections to make the boats less of a submarine, and reduce the stress on the crew.


Please explain the logic that you've employed to determine that an open cockpit is any less safe than one that is closed at the back.

I've sailed on plenty of both types of design and I just can't foresee how the open transom is worse. In fact, during those hectic moments it's always felt like the cockpits that are closed off in the back are just getting in the way.

Furthermore, I think you're really underestimating the amount of green water over the decks in big seas when you're moving at 25kts. With all this talk of crew comfort and safety, I can't imagine those guys buying into the idea of having to stand in a few feet of cold water for half the race. Hell with the amount of water that would be sitting in the cockpit, free surface effect could become a concern (please note the final point on free surface effect was firmly tongue in cheek)


Forget the crew's feeting getting wet, they are in super cold conditions transom or not. It is the weight of water, probably 2 to 3 tonnes of it minimum, which will be in the boat, and loading the boat when they go off the next wave and crash into it's flat back. Open transom is a requirement because it is safer. No VO70 gets "pooped" outrun but a wave that crashes into the cockpit from astern. That is a mindset from IOR days.


+ 1. Safer ! when we had our first 7/8 rig lightweight back in '77 she had a full transom and tiny aft-deck, which were gone by the next year, just copied others as we thought it was safer. Not sure we would have gone through the '79 Fastnet without the open transom.
Fixture came to everybody from sailing experience, nothing else.

#189 Koukel

Koukel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,022 posts
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 20 April 2012 - 07:55 PM

It is interesting how this discussion has focussed on detail design instead of the premise which opened the discussion: The overall design parameters need to be changed to ensure greater seaworthiness and crew safety.

Well he also called the boats inshore designs and the whole race a sham. He was clearly spouting rhetoric as 70's have sailed through lots of oceans. I think he was drunk.

Same point without all the name calling gets us a much shorter thread.

As to your point, it seems like a bunch of people disagree. Not that that makes you wrong.

Koukel

#190 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,195 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 23 April 2012 - 08:19 PM

I think that all the yacht engineers are looking at their programs to determine why the forward laminates were not up to the job.
Camper/ETNZ have to do more than that because their structure failed globally, so they missed something. But it's really hard to know what went wrong first.

I'm impressed by how much lighter Groupama seems to be forward than near sisters Telefonica and Puma. This may be due to the fact that their rig is raked way further back, but I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't something else going on as well. Maybe their LCG just looks further aft and the bow seems to rise much quicker and easier. Camper seems to spend a lot of time throwing a lot of water around with her bow, as does Abu Dhabi. Which just looks slow, they throw spray when Groupama seems to "release" and fly. The fact that Camper is like this doesn't really surprise me because it was Nicko's comment about Il Monstro last time around.

I'm also surprised by the lack of protection the sailors are happy with. This may be macho, but I would be temped to do something to keep water off the deck and give the guys in the cockpit something of a fighting chance of staying at their stations during boat washes. Having the helmsman knocked off the wheel just seems wrong, and I think that sometime after the 1000 wave in the face you lose some of your willingness to drive the boat hard.

I'm also thinking you probably want very heavy sail bags, or at least ones that hold a lot of water and don't drain very fast.
SHC

#191 Wacka Elvis

Wacka Elvis

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 09:17 PM





"Cockpit shall open aft to the sea." Does that sound like a feature designed to ensure the safety of the crew in heavy seas?


Have you seen the amount of water which comes over the deck of these boats and winds up in the cockpit?


It is perfectly possible to have adequate cockpit drains without an open stern. Back to the first post on this thread, the author was recommending flair in the bow sections to make the boats less of a submarine, and reduce the stress on the crew.


Please explain the logic that you've employed to determine that an open cockpit is any less safe than one that is closed at the back.

I've sailed on plenty of both types of design and I just can't foresee how the open transom is worse. In fact, during those hectic moments it's always felt like the cockpits that are closed off in the back are just getting in the way.

Furthermore, I think you're really underestimating the amount of green water over the decks in big seas when you're moving at 25kts. With all this talk of crew comfort and safety, I can't imagine those guys buying into the idea of having to stand in a few feet of cold water for half the race. Hell with the amount of water that would be sitting in the cockpit, free surface effect could become a concern (please note the final point on free surface effect was firmly tongue in cheek)


Forget the crew's feeting getting wet, they are in super cold conditions transom or not. It is the weight of water, probably 2 to 3 tonnes of it minimum, which will be in the boat, and loading the boat when they go off the next wave and crash into it's flat back. Open transom is a requirement because it is safer. No VO70 gets "pooped" outrun but a wave that crashes into the cockpit from astern. That is a mindset from IOR days.



+1 and also much easier to get out from an upside-down boat if the transom is open... gets my vote.

#192 Lost in Translation

Lost in Translation

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 887 posts
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 23 April 2012 - 10:38 PM

Steve, good comments. I've remarked before on Camper being bow down and am curious what Nico said in the past. Seems like it a lighter air config - the opposite of what has done well in previous V70 races. Perhaps that bow down attitude contributed to the stresses.


Clever idea on sail bags that hold water. And I agree on protection. I used to want to do this race on the 60s but the 70s are too wet. Of course I'm getting older too....



#193 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,986 posts

Posted 24 April 2012 - 05:30 AM

+1 Steve, during the last start i really noticed the boats in general seem to be pushing a lot of water, but the aforementioned ones the most. Like the idea of "soaker" sailbags, all the old Finn guys can donate to their favorite team. starting with Prof. Gus, now that he has the Dubarrys. Be groaning during the tacks'n'gybes, though.

#194 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:27 AM

I think that all the yacht engineers are looking at their programs to determine why the forward laminates were not up to the job.
Camper/ETNZ have to do more than that because their structure failed globally, so they missed something. But it's really hard to know what went wrong first.

I'm impressed by how much lighter Groupama seems to be forward than near sisters Telefonica and Puma. This may be due to the fact that their rig is raked way further back, but I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't something else going on as well. Maybe their LCG just looks further aft and the bow seems to rise much quicker and easier. Camper seems to spend a lot of time throwing a lot of water around with her bow, as does Abu Dhabi. Which just looks slow, they throw spray when Groupama seems to "release" and fly. The fact that Camper is like this doesn't really surprise me because it was Nicko's comment about Il Monstro last time around.

I'm also surprised by the lack of protection the sailors are happy with. This may be macho, but I would be temped to do something to keep water off the deck and give the guys in the cockpit something of a fighting chance of staying at their stations during boat washes. Having the helmsman knocked off the wheel just seems wrong, and I think that sometime after the 1000 wave in the face you lose some of your willingness to drive the boat hard.

I'm also thinking you probably want very heavy sail bags, or at least ones that hold a lot of water and don't drain very fast.
SHC



Steve, I think you will find the trim has more to do with bulb position than how light the construction is up forwards. Remember, these are keel boats. and no one is allowed to go lighter in construction than the rules permit, and they won't have intentionally gone heavier. Groupama clearly has her bulb further aft than the other JYD boats. It can be seen when they are aout of the water, or by looking at her certificate.
A lot of consideration has gone into getting the water off the boats as rapidly as possible. The Abu Dhabi design is to try and get as much water off the boat before it reaches the cockpit. As noted before, the guys could have removable additional dodgers and spray deflectors if they wanted that was separate from the rule and weight calculations, but they don't want them. Only they can answer why.
As far as bags that retain water is concerned, that is nothing new and the Volvo 70 rule (11.9) specifically prohibits it, as did the Volvo 60 rule before it.

#195 Panoramix

Panoramix

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 362 posts
  • Location:Rennes, Brittany, France

Posted 24 April 2012 - 11:20 AM

I remember reading an article with Cammas (I think) saying that Groupama had a bulb positioned aft so that the boat would be less of a submarine so that they could push harder in iffy conditions.

They seem to be struggling since Itajai speedwise, I wonder if it is mast related or if they are geared too much toward breezy conditions.

Regarding the volvo box rule, I think that it is unvoluntarily pushing toward boats behaving like submarines. That is dangerous to the crew and the structure. I am not entirely sure how you could solve this issue though. Freeboard, lighter but less powerful boats would probably help, on a 70 feet boat you can have quite a lot of freeboard without the boat "looking wrong".

#196 Le Shark

Le Shark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 208 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 April 2012 - 11:34 AM

As noted before, the guys could have removable additional dodgers and spray deflectors if they wanted that was separate from the rule and weight calculations, but they don't want them. Only they can answer why.


Some of the recent footage from Camper shows a removable spray (green water??) deflector fitted to the windward side deck just forward of the cockpit. It looked like it might be more to stop the stack getting washed off the rail than to really keep much water out the boat though.

#197 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 24 April 2012 - 12:22 PM

From Moose's blog :

"...
So while we are on damage subject, I think its a good time to give you my perspective on why the fleet had so many issues on this last leg. Firstly as everyone is saying you have to divide the two problems up. For sure there have been structural problems and there have been rig problems. For me the rule makers with regards to the structures thought they had done the right thing with the rule to make the boats have “spare weight” in the assumption that the teams would put this into the strength of the boats. At the same time they upped the structural requirement of the rule with regards to meeting a different set of International standards. This, at first glance, all seems to be a positive – there was however one little loophole though which all the teams have jumped through and that is what state you could weigh your boat in. Telefonica Blue last time was one of the two lightest boats in the fleet, now “sailing weight” wise so if you just picked the boat up when we are at the dock (without sails on it…) the new boats probably sail 250 kgs lighter then we can on what was Tele Blue. SO the bottom line is that the additional weight didn’t end up being spare after all, the teams have used it instead of strengthening the boats to add all the bits into the weight equation that they can get away with, a particularly large bonus if that weight happens to be stackable!! For sure this is something that needs to get sorted out for the next race if the rule stays around.

Then the second issue with regards to rigs – for me this is due to the fact that the teams simply were not able to spend enough time on the water with their equipment leading up to the start. With ABN AMRO, we spent six months pretty much sailing with the same rigging set up that we were going to use in the race, with Team Sanya we were not able to do even six weeks!! We just didn’t have the time. For the next race IF everyone feels that the teams just won’t be doing the time on the water, then we will probably have to take a more conservative approach with things like rigging, but they will have to make it a rule, as when the time comes of course everyone realises that you need reliability and you need to finish to win, but also there aren’t that many areas that there are any gains left on the table and rigging is one of them…
..."

IF the rule stays around. Put that way, I think there is motivation on his part that it does NOT stay around.

I am not buying the weight scenario he states on face value. Weight management of any race boat is crucial. It is a long way to say that because a boat like Tele blue initiated things like removable jammers and now all boats have saved real sailing weight by exploiting this and similar tricks, that is the reason the core shears or a ring frame collapses. It may well be the reason they are faster! Sanya is also 250 kg heavier than others because they changed and beefed up the rudders bearings, changed daggerboards, repaired the bow, and probably did not have the time to incorporate every latest winch, gearbox, and piece of custom kit. Etc. etc.

The real question is, can a strong enough VO70 be built with the rules as they stand and their weight budget. If not, why not.

#198 Moonduster

Moonduster

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,371 posts

Posted 24 April 2012 - 12:46 PM

It would be interesting to estimate how the increased panel weight compares to the difference in total hull weight in this version of the rule. My guess is that they added more panel weight than they added hull weight and, as a result, they reduced the amount of structure that could be built. Does anyone have a copy of the V70 Rule from the last go round?

#199 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,195 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 24 April 2012 - 12:57 PM

Nico said that the last Puma was fast, but couldn't be driven as hard as the Juan boats. Botin would have studied this and probably made some improvement but would have also tried to keep the edge old Puma had.
Yeah, I know that where you hang the lead and all that, but you are still going to concentrate weight in the hull structure, and where things are within the hull will affect the trim. Moving the tanks and engine aft a meter for example.
However there seems to be a difference within the Juan fleet as well. I thought Goupama was ballasted further aft, which would also explain the rake...although with canting keels location of he ballast is independent of where the center of lateral resistance is located. If they are trimmed ass down, they probably have a harder time in the light stuff.
I thought the rules would have something about sail bags, but it struck me hat the question of light or heavy sails was complex. Normally you want the sail inventory to be as light as possible. I'm sure the designers did the VPP analysis on this, but it seems that there might be an advantage for heavier sails on a Volvo 70. More sails are sitting on the high side than are in the air. So you might net out more stability with heavy sails.
All the fast ocean multis have gone for some form of crew protection. These guys aren't pussies, so I figure it just comes down to managing your health over he long haul. I saw the wave deflector on Camper and thought it was a bit of a lash up. I mean if there is someplace where you want the water to go it would be into the stack, where even with the best intentions, it's going to take some time to drain. I don't know what the solution is, but there is one.
Finally, I think the cost controls that VOR have put in place are undesirable from a performance and safety standpoint. Essentially they have driven the teams to set off in boats that cannot be modified after they have been measured, and they more or less can't leave the builder without being measured. I understand the need to prevent a moding race where boats are reassembled from a vast kit of parts for each leg of the race. But it also seems harsh for a team to have to flog a dog all the way around the world when a fairly simple rework would make them more competitive. Also you should be able to sail enough to understand you boat at sea in abusive conditions and correct whatever you need to to be safe.
It would be really important for VOR to determine how to make it possible for boats to go around more than once. Rule stability would keep 2012 boats in the mix, but also more flexibility for teams to modify those boats for future races so they are more competitive than Sanya would improve the chances of getting more teams involved.
SHC

#200 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 24 April 2012 - 01:12 PM

It would be interesting to estimate how the increased panel weight compares to the difference in total hull weight in this version of the rule. My guess is that they added more panel weight than they added hull weight and, as a result, they reduced the amount of structure that could be built. Does anyone have a copy of the V70 Rule from the last go round?

Panel weights haven't changed since version 1 of the rule. Structural requirements have only changed due to the ISO standard going from a draft standard in 2003 to being a final standard for the 2008 race. In the process the standard increased structural requirements in the slamming area slightly. No changes were made for this version from a structural point of view apart from the all up weight increase.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users