Jump to content


Volvo 70 design


  • Please log in to reply
214 replies to this topic

#1 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 05:23 PM

When is this design bs going to stop , when another good sailor and person dies ??? ( Hans ) There is no reason to abuse the crews with a boat designed for inshore sailing , the Open 60 designs have evolved over years of ocean racing to protect the crew ,how hard would it be to have a similar design criterion for the 70's even put a bunch of flare on the bows to stop hosing the bowmen and crew in the cockpit , then to have a stop of less then a week before the southern ocean leg after the crew where completely depleted from the last idiotic leg ,this race has become a total sham at the expense of the crew . Come on guys get real ,and Knut ,you should know better.

#2 gybe-ho!

gybe-ho!

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,363 posts
  • Location:Curled up in the lee of Bum Island

Posted 25 March 2012 - 05:40 PM

Pretty punchy start...obviously read previous posts on other threads and riding on thier coat tails...whose Sockpuppet are you?

Oh, and tits please.

#3 JL92S

JL92S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 09:56 PM

Those guys are on decent money and what's the slogan for the Volvo ocean race? Is it "easy cruise around the world"? No i don't think so. You must be a cruiser

#4 tekwa

tekwa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 85 posts

Posted 25 March 2012 - 10:30 PM

When is this design bs going to stop , when another good sailor and person dies ??? ( Hans ) There is no reason to abuse the crews with a boat designed for inshore sailing , the Open 60 designs have evolved over years of ocean racing to protect the crew ,how hard would it be to have a similar design criterion for the 70's even put a bunch of flare on the bows to stop hosing the bowmen and crew in the cockpit , then to have a stop of less then a week before the southern ocean leg after the crew where completely depleted from the last idiotic leg ,this race has become a total sham at the expense of the crew . Come on guys get real ,and Knut ,you should know better.



Please remind me how many of them did not finished last Vende. Whenever someone poped to first place either lost a rig, rudder or something else. for sure LeCam felt very safe in his capsised boat.

#5 Swanno (Ohf Shore)

Swanno (Ohf Shore)

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,782 posts
  • Location:Perth, Western Australia

Posted 25 March 2012 - 11:57 PM

the more important question is: When will the influx of Newbies stop?

#6 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 06:30 AM

I figured my posting would get the armchairs going ,it's always real cosy sitting at home writing bs comments ,when some of my good friends are being put in harms way by stupid designs because they are paid professionals and will shut up and sail what they are given to sail , does this make it right to not make it safer for them. You got to love this site that Scott set up where even idiots can comment on something they know nothing about or will ever experience ,look at me for instance , I'm classed as a newbie because I opened a new profile and started a new topic that is really important for many professionals and their families .If you can't make a good comment about a life or death situation rather rock the chair a little faster to get your fix

#7 harzak

harzak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 566 posts
  • Location:Norway

Posted 26 March 2012 - 07:00 AM

I figured my posting would get the armchairs going ,it's always real cosy sitting at home writing bs comments ,when some of my good friends are being put in harms way by stupid designs because they are paid professionals and will shut up and sail what they are given to sail , does this make it right to not make it safer for them. You got to love this site that Scott set up where even idiots can comment on something they know nothing about or will ever experience ,look at me for instance , I'm classed as a newbie because I opened a new profile and started a new topic that is really important for many professionals and their families .If you can't make a good comment about a life or death situation rather rock the chair a little faster to get your fix

Fair enough. Are you speaking for your professional friends in this matter?

#8 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,765 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 07:12 AM

when some of my good friends are being put in harms way by stupid designs because they are paid professionals


"Put in harms way"......hmmmm.......

Well yes, I earn my living at a keyboard and repetitive strain injury is about the biggest risk I face. I do however know some professional racing sailors.

I've plenty of sympathy for, say, NATO troops in Afghanistan who have been put in harms way. Even though they are volunteers who signed up, for many of them, life hasn't presented as many opportunities for advancement as it does for others.

I've plenty of sympathy for those working in high-risk industries like the offshore oil business or fishing. They chose that way of living but in many cases, they didn't have too many other choices.

I would struggle to find very much sympathy for those who might choose to make a living in what is presented as "Extreme Sport" and then complain about "being put in harms way". Isn't that precisely what it said on the can? On the whole however I think professional sailors are smart people who understand and accept - even relish - precisely what they signed up for and the choices they have made.

#9 tekwa

tekwa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 85 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 07:54 AM

I figured my posting would get the armchairs going ,it's always real cosy sitting at home writing bs comments ,when some of my good friends are being put in harms way by stupid designs because they are paid professionals and will shut up and sail what they are given to sail , does this make it right to not make it safer for them. You got to love this site that Scott set up where even idiots can comment on something they know nothing about or will ever experience ,look at me for instance , I'm classed as a newbie because I opened a new profile and started a new topic that is really important for many professionals and their families .If you can't make a good comment about a life or death situation rather rock the chair a little faster to get your fix



Dude, you realy are self centred idiot. What makes you think that everyone, apart from you, is an armchair here? Why do you think boat design is a problem now and not the build? What about the wheatherand actual sailors income to this issue? Maybe your pro friend should tell you next time, how much are they realy involved in the whole proces. (shut up and sail what they are given to sail? you gotta be kidding me) Why was Leg 4 idiotic? Cause it unfolded on last day and kept every folower glued to screen for two weeks? Now your not happy with a so far "saemaship" leg. Let alone your post about safe open 60s .What would be a good enough leg and boat design for you then?
Newbies may not be baned from discusions, but idiots should.

#10 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 08:10 AM

There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.

#11 Swanno (Ohf Shore)

Swanno (Ohf Shore)

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,782 posts
  • Location:Perth, Western Australia

Posted 26 March 2012 - 10:56 AM

I figured my posting would get the armchairs going ,it's always real cosy sitting at home writing bs comments ,when some of my good friends are being put in harms way by stupid designs because they are paid professionals and will shut up and sail what they are given to sail , does this make it right to not make it safer for them. You got to love this site that Scott set up where even idiots can comment on something they know nothing about or will ever experience ,look at me for instance , I'm classed as a newbie because I opened a new profile and started a new topic that is really important for many professionals and their families .If you can't make a good comment about a life or death situation rather rock the chair a little faster to get your fix


Funny I don't recall people being forced into doing the race but as I apparently have no idea, there may be armed squads who come into yacht club bars and kidnap the best crews and force them to sail around in some of the most advanced powerful ocean racing yachts and pretend like they're having a ball for most of the time.

Isn't the VOR tag line "life at the extreme"

Nothing too extreme about sailing J24's around the cans which is why you don't see it pasted on the front pages of web pages.

If you've got mates doing the race why dont you ask them?

And while you're at it, let's slow down car racing, no more aircraft travel and let's comfortable in our armchairs and never move because it is too scary.

#12 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 03:04 PM

1332749440[/url]' post='3643741']
There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation

#13 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 03:23 PM

1332745961[/url]' post='3643706']

1332743415[/url]' post='3643681']
when some of my good friends are being put in harms way by stupid designs because they are paid professionals


"Put in harms way"......hmmmm.......

Well yes, I earn my living at a keyboard and repetitive strain injury is about the biggest risk I face. I do however know some professional racing sailors.

I've plenty of sympathy for, say, NATO troops in Afghanistan who have been put in harms way. Even though they are volunteers who signed up, for many of them, life hasn't presented as many opportunities for advancement as it does for others.

I've plenty of sympathy for those working in high-risk industries like the offshore oil business or fishing. They chose that way of living but in many cases, they didn't have too many other choices.

I would struggle to find very much sympathy for those who might choose to make a living in what is presented as "Extreme Sport" and then complain about "being put in harms way". Isn't that precisely what it said on the can? On the whole however I think professional sailors are smart people who understand and accept - even relish - precisely what they signed up for and the choices they have made.


Dogwatch ,from your reply ,it sounds like you have a well rounded view of the world mate ,but you are not getting the point here , it's not about the extreme sportsmen and women who choose the profession they do or the soldier who gets ordered into a hot area , it's about getting a bunch of guys who have families around the marble as safely as possible . It's not in the build of the boat ,if they don't break they are overbuilt ,it's in the design box rule . The excitement of the race isn't going to change if all the boats afforded the crew more protection from the possibility of getting seriously injured or killed , ask Mikey Pammenter if he wants to do another face plant into a board and loose another tooth or Pepe Ribes if he wants to hang off the wheel again with the boat lying on its side , do you think they will say yeh sign me up?Anybody who has had a serious punishing offshore never wants it to happen again ,they just deal with it if it does and hope they don't get injured or killed .



#14 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

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

Posted 26 March 2012 - 03:24 PM

When is this design bs going to stop , when another good sailor and person dies ??? ( Hans ) There is no reason to abuse the crews with a boat designed for inshore sailing , the Open 60 designs have evolved over years of ocean racing to protect the crew ,how hard would it be to have a similar design criterion for the 70's even put a bunch of flare on the bows to stop hosing the bowmen and crew in the cockpit , then to have a stop of less then a week before the southern ocean leg after the crew where completely depleted from the last idiotic leg ,this race has become a total sham at the expense of the crew . Come on guys get real ,and Knut ,you should know better.


First, thanks for creating this roach motel, at least it will help eliminate contamination on the other threads.

But what specifically is your complaint? The lack of a dodger? How is the lack of time between legs the designer's fault?

Oh, and you totally lost me on "last idiotic leg". Leg 4 was one of the most excellent offshore races ever. Too bad they did that strange timed start and didn't just postpone the start until the next day. But that is a minor quibble. It wasn't "idiotic", it was awesome.

#15 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 03:32 PM

1332749440[/url]' post='3643741']
There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation


If you have done all this then you will know the answers to your own questions. The sailors are intimately involved in the decision making processes. The lack of protection is their choice (no measurement effect as it isn't included in the measured condition, and the push to save weight in the structure is also driven by the sailors.

#16 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,765 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 03:58 PM

ask Mikey Pammenter if he wants to do another face plant into a board and loose another tooth or Pepe Ribes if he wants to hang off the wheel again with the boat lying on its side , do you think they will say yeh sign me up?


Yes history shows that given the opportunity to do another VOR most of the sailors would sign up. People get hurt and worse in plenty of sports. On the whole it doesn't put them off. Perhaps the human race isn't that intelligent. Perhaps the desire for adventure is deeply seated in some.

#17 starrchallenge

starrchallenge

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Location:Swampscott, Massachusetts
  • Interests:Still enjoy a nice Mount Gay after a fine day racing Yachts. More time at Sea the better.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 04:15 PM


There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation


Welcome to SA, Mate. (Couple more posts and you will lose Newbie tag) I believe the intent of your post is to question whether it makes sense for Racing Sailors to be down below Grinding Carbon rather then racing. Over the last 10 years we have huge leaps in technology. The V0 70 is a weapon. All of the racers know it and fear/respect its power. Anyone here who thinks that these guys sign up to put themselves at Risk are just idiots. They take very calculated risks but expect that the boat will be seaworthy at least to take the punishment that an Ocean Boat should be able to handle. All boats have issues, but I find it absolutely unacceptable for the VO 70 to continue to have structural issues. Sanya lost a rudder probably hitting something, I can except that breakage. Rigs dropping again a risk that exists with carrying all that sail area. But having these boats not holding up to structural loads is unacceptable. I never once felt unsafe on a VO 60, yes the rig flexed pretty good as we launched off 5M waves upwind. Yes it was wet due to water ballast, But as I sat on the can in the forward compartment having a dump I was pretty comfortable with the materials banging off the waves. Carbon Fibre does not seem to give the same comfort level. I'm not a designer and do not intend to get in a pissing match with anyone over what people sign up for, but seriously the fact that we are not seeing a new 600M record is due to the Structural Issues of the VO 70. She Can't take the loads!

#18 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 05:01 PM

1332778506[/url]' post='3644173']

1332774291[/url]' post='3644063']

1332749440[/url]' post='3643741']
There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation


Welcome to SA, Mate. (Couple more posts and you will lose Newbie tag) I believe the intent of your post is to question whether it makes sense for Racing Sailors to be down below Grinding Carbon rather then racing. Over the last 10 years we have huge leaps in technology. The V0 70 is a weapon. All of the racers know it and fear/respect its power. Anyone here who thinks that these guys sign up to put themselves at Risk are just idiots. They take very calculated risks but expect that the boat will be seaworthy at least to take the punishment that an Ocean Boat should be able to handle. All boats have issues, but I find it absolutely unacceptable for the VO 70 to continue to have structural issues. Sanya lost a rudder probably hitting something, I can except that breakage. Rigs dropping again a risk that exists with carrying all that sail area. But having these boats not holding up to structural loads is unacceptable. I never once felt unsafe on a VO 60, yes the rig flexed pretty good as we launched off 5M waves upwind. Yes it was wet due to water ballast, But as I sat on the can in the forward compartment having a dump I was pretty comfortable with the materials banging off the waves. Carbon Fibre does not seem to give the same comfort level. I'm not a designer and do not intend to get in a pissing match with anyone over what people sign up for, but seriously the fact that we are not seeing a new 600M record is due to the Structural Issues of the VO 70. She Can't take the loads!


Star , you get it bro ,glad there are others out there that have the wherewithall . I hear you about the shitter on the 60's ,on Yamaha we had the shitter in the mast step compartment which was also used to dry the foulies with the diesel fired heater exhausting through the rig ,it was a small compartment and you felt safe ,on the Andrews designed Americas Challenge the shitter was in the forward watertight compartment right next to the Sat B dish so you hoped nobody wanted to call home in the middle of you taking a dump , this design change didn't feel as safe as you had a very large play room next to a microwave emitter and coming off a big wave ,you could end up 20' away right in the bow with your foulies around your ankles . And thanks for the welcome unfortunately the new name is new cus I couldn't remember the old login info from when Scott first started SA as I didnt post much through the years so misplaced it .Anyhow back to the armchair reaming ,you got to love how personal this armchair crowd make it from lack of doing it properIt sorts out the boys from the wannabe's ,but nothing personal ,each to his own



#19 starrchallenge

starrchallenge

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Location:Swampscott, Massachusetts
  • Interests:Still enjoy a nice Mount Gay after a fine day racing Yachts. More time at Sea the better.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 05:33 PM




There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation


Welcome to SA, Mate. (Couple more posts and you will lose Newbie tag) I believe the intent of your post is to question whether it makes sense for Racing Sailors to be down below Grinding Carbon rather then racing. Over the last 10 years we have huge leaps in technology. The V0 70 is a weapon. All of the racers know it and fear/respect its power. Anyone here who thinks that these guys sign up to put themselves at Risk are just idiots. They take very calculated risks but expect that the boat will be seaworthy at least to take the punishment that an Ocean Boat should be able to handle. All boats have issues, but I find it absolutely unacceptable for the VO 70 to continue to have structural issues. Sanya lost a rudder probably hitting something, I can except that breakage. Rigs dropping again a risk that exists with carrying all that sail area. But having these boats not holding up to structural loads is unacceptable. I never once felt unsafe on a VO 60, yes the rig flexed pretty good as we launched off 5M waves upwind. Yes it was wet due to water ballast, But as I sat on the can in the forward compartment having a dump I was pretty comfortable with the materials banging off the waves. Carbon Fibre does not seem to give the same comfort level. I'm not a designer and do not intend to get in a pissing match with anyone over what people sign up for, but seriously the fact that we are not seeing a new 600M record is due to the Structural Issues of the VO 70. She Can't take the loads!


Star , you get it bro ,glad there are others out there that have the wherewithall . I hear you about the shitter on the 60's ,on Yamaha we had the shitter in the mast step compartment which was also used to dry the foulies with the diesel fired heater exhausting through the rig ,it was a small compartment and you felt safe ,on the Andrews designed Americas Challenge the shitter was in the forward watertight compartment right next to the Sat B dish so you hoped nobody wanted to call home in the middle of you taking a dump , this design change didn't feel as safe as you had a very large play room next to a microwave emitter and coming off a big wave ,you could end up 20' away right in the bow with your foulies around your ankles . And thanks for the welcome unfortunately the new name is new cus I couldn't remember the old login info from when Scott first started SA as I didnt post much through the years so misplaced it .Anyhow back to the armchair reaming ,you got to love how personal this armchair crowd make it from lack of doing it properIt sorts out the boys from the wannabe's ,but nothing personal ,each to his own



Right on brother, Sailed on DHL (Former EF Language) for a couple Hobarts. The shitter was through Forward Hatch on right side with the striptease poll being the only thing that kept you from launching. Once closed the door it was an unbelievable experience to be alone in the Bow section of one of these Yachts while racing.

The harden the fuck up crowd are idiots and can't understand that if Risk can be prevented they should have a serious look at what we are doing. Not sure if you are aware of the SpeedDream project to create the world's fastest Monohull. Pretty slick and using wave piercing hull will remove a lot of the loads the current fleet are challenged with. Saw Vlad and Brian give a presentation here in Marblehead and they will have the 27 ft prototype done by May. This could be the future of the Volvo, and looks to get the right balance between speed and crew abiility to manage. Check it out. Sure arm chair crowd will have something to say on here, but these guys are doing something pretty cool and they fully admit they have some ideas that may or may not work. Gotta love innovation.

#20 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 05:44 PM

Simple fact is that if you applied the same loads to a Volvo 60 that they are applying to the Volvo 70s they wouldn't take it. The faster you hit water the harder it is. The Volvo 70 structural requirements are significantly higher than the 60s were, and significantly higher than any other composite yachts.

#21 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 06:11 PM

1332783220[/url]' post='3644272']

1332781268[/url]' post='3644238']

1332778506[/url]' post='3644173']

1332774291[/url]' post='3644063']

1332749440[/url]' post='3643741']
There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation


Welcome to SA, Mate. (Couple more posts and you will lose Newbie tag) I believe the intent of your post is to question whether it makes sense for Racing Sailors to be down below Grinding Carbon rather then racing. Over the last 10 years we have huge leaps in technology. The V0 70 is a weapon. All of the racers know it and fear/respect its power. Anyone here who thinks that these guys sign up to put themselves at Risk are just idiots. They take very calculated risks but expect that the boat will be seaworthy at least to take the punishment that an Ocean Boat should be able to handle. All boats have issues, but I find it absolutely unacceptable for the VO 70 to continue to have structural issues. Sanya lost a rudder probably hitting something, I can except that breakage. Rigs dropping again a risk that exists with carrying all that sail area. But having these boats not holding up to structural loads is unacceptable. I never once felt unsafe on a VO 60, yes the rig flexed pretty good as we launched off 5M waves upwind. Yes it was wet due to water ballast, But as I sat on the can in the forward compartment having a dump I was pretty comfortable with the materials banging off the waves. Carbon Fibre does not seem to give the same comfort level. I'm not a designer and do not intend to get in a pissing match with anyone over what people sign up for, but seriously the fact that we are not seeing a new 600M record is due to the Structural Issues of the VO 70. She Can't take the loads!


Star , you get it bro ,glad there are others out there that have the wherewithall . I hear you about the shitter on the 60's ,on Yamaha we had the shitter in the mast step compartment which was also used to dry the foulies with the diesel fired heater exhausting through the rig ,it was a small compartment and you felt safe ,on the Andrews designed Americas Challenge the shitter was in the forward watertight compartment right next to the Sat B dish so you hoped nobody wanted to call home in the middle of you taking a dump , this design change didn't feel as safe as you had a very large play room next to a microwave emitter and coming off a big wave ,you could end up 20' away right in the bow with your foulies around your ankles . And thanks for the welcome unfortunately the new name is new cus I couldn't remember the old login info from when Scott first started SA as I didnt post much through the years so misplaced it .Anyhow back to the armchair reaming ,you got to love how personal this armchair crowd make it from lack of doing it properIt sorts out the boys from the wannabe's ,but nothing personal ,each to his own



Right on brother, Sailed on DHL (Former EF Language) for a couple Hobarts. The shitter was through Forward Hatch on right side with the striptease poll being the only thing that kept you from launching. Once closed the door it was an unbelievable experience to be alone in the Bow section of one of these Yachts while racing.

The harden the fuck up crowd are idiots and can't understand that if Risk can be prevented they should have a serious look at what we are doing. Not sure if you are aware of the SpeedDream project to create the world's fastest Monohull. Pretty slick and using wave piercing hull will remove a lot of the loads the current fleet are challenged with. Saw Vlad and Brian give a presentation here in Marblehead and they will have the 27 ft prototype done by May. This could be the future of the Volvo, and looks to get the right balance between speed and crew abiility to manage. Check it out. Sure arm chair crowd will have something to say on here, but these guys are doing something pretty cool and they fully admit they have some ideas that may or may not work. Gotta love innovation.

Yep been watching that , Brian is an old mate and he sends me all the latest on email, we go back to the same crowd in the Atlantic Privateer days even before Drum .It may just be the way to overcome the pounding ,pierce through instead of trying to break it up ,it's getting closer to multi technology or should I say monomaran ,it will be interesting to see how it turns out .I see the talk is now drifting to the loads and how the 70's have more than the 60's , I guess that's why the J133 has more load than the J80 to put it in more understandable terms , you got to love it .



#22 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 06:25 PM

1332749440[/url]' post='3643741']
There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation


What Open 50 do you own? Coversation with you! no thanks with an attitude like yours your talking shit. So you have an intimate knowledge of designs and sailed on a few Volvo and whitbread .Your so good your telling everyone on Anarchy. Fuck I cant stop laughing.Your be telling me next you have some good pictures of ya wife. HA HA Fucking unreal. If you have done what you said, you would not have to talk about it ,you would be known.

#23 starrchallenge

starrchallenge

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Location:Swampscott, Massachusetts
  • Interests:Still enjoy a nice Mount Gay after a fine day racing Yachts. More time at Sea the better.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 06:32 PM

Just saw Ken Read's post and these guys are very concerned as they see their competitors slow down. Sure this will get a fair bit of attention once race finishes and this post will garner some more input in time from some people that have inside track on what is acceptable design for the Volvo Ocean race. I was merely wondering whether Carbon Fibre has passed the test. Based on what watching it sure seems boys are spending more time fixing the Carbon Yachts than sailing them hard. Why are they falling apart?

Hey YachtDynamics, will be catching up with Brian soon. We share a similar good story as both of us have met women at Maddies. He his 3rd wife! and me my fiance and hopefully only wife. We also share a love of good South African Red Wine. Will pass on regards.

#24 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 07:08 PM

1332786727[/url]' post='3644342']
Just saw Ken Read's post and these guys are very concerned as they see their competitors slow down. Sure this will get a fair bit of attention once race finishes and this post will garner some more input in time from some people that have inside track on what is acceptable design for the Volvo Ocean race. I was merely wondering whether Carbon Fibre has passed the test. Based on what watching it sure seems boys are spending more time fixing the Carbon Yachts than sailing them hard. Why are they falling apart?

Hey YachtDynamics, will be catching up with Brian soon. We share a similar good story as both of us have met women at Maddies. He his 3rd wife! and me my fiance and hopefully only wife. We also share a love of good South African Red Wine. Will pass on regards.


Carbon is good if you do it right ,but maybe a hybrid carbon/Kevlar mix may be good for the impact zone ,probably would have saved Moose's issue with the tear . It is a real worry for the other boats when the sced shows a boat that was next to you has dropped 50 miles and is doing half the speed .Damn you guys are trolling at Maddies ,hope it only after a race or something ,because you don't find good stock there on an off nite ,haha . Yep , I guess Brian has lost his South African upbringing to stick with the first one till she shoots you . Don't do it bro , my dad always said to me if it fucks ,flies or floats rent it ,I didn't believe him and married a commercial pilot and own two boats and they all cost money . South African wine damn that has cost money and many hours to , I built a house in Franschoek a while back which is where a bunch of good wine comes from in SA ,it was pretty good for a short while .Yeh tell that old Jappie bugger I said hey

#25 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

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

Posted 26 March 2012 - 07:17 PM

1. Why was Leg 4 "idiotic"?

2. What do the designers have to do with the reduced time between leg 4 finish and Leg 5 start?

3. What specifically do you want changed on the current boats? According to Who's Your Daddy, who seems to know, these boats are built to higher scantlings than Open 60's, so basically you want them to have less rig, right?

It's a lovely rant, but these are tomorrow's "good old days" too. Older salts longed for the oil-skin days probably, when men were men and you could tell by their breath.

#26 harzak

harzak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 566 posts
  • Location:Norway

Posted 26 March 2012 - 09:28 PM




...

...

...


Right on brother, Sailed on DHL (Former EF Language) for a couple Hobarts. The shitter was through Forward Hatch on right side with the striptease poll being the only thing that kept you from launching. Once closed the door it was an unbelievable experience to be alone in the Bow section of one of these Yachts while racing.

The harden the fuck up crowd are idiots and can't understand that if Risk can be prevented they should have a serious look at what we are doing. Not sure if you are aware of the SpeedDream project to create the world's fastest Monohull. Pretty slick and using wave piercing hull will remove a lot of the loads the current fleet are challenged with. Saw Vlad and Brian give a presentation here in Marblehead and they will have the 27 ft prototype done by May. This could be the future of the Volvo, and looks to get the right balance between speed and crew abiility to manage. Check it out. Sure arm chair crowd will have something to say on here, but these guys are doing something pretty cool and they fully admit they have some ideas that may or may not work. Gotta love innovation.


So, which of you guys are which? :D

Attached Files



#27 starrchallenge

starrchallenge

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Location:Swampscott, Massachusetts
  • Interests:Still enjoy a nice Mount Gay after a fine day racing Yachts. More time at Sea the better.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 11:01 PM





...

...

...


Right on brother, Sailed on DHL (Former EF Language) for a couple Hobarts. The shitter was through Forward Hatch on right side with the striptease poll being the only thing that kept you from launching. Once closed the door it was an unbelievable experience to be alone in the Bow section of one of these Yachts while racing.

The harden the fuck up crowd are idiots and can't understand that if Risk can be prevented they should have a serious look at what we are doing. Not sure if you are aware of the SpeedDream project to create the world's fastest Monohull. Pretty slick and using wave piercing hull will remove a lot of the loads the current fleet are challenged with. Saw Vlad and Brian give a presentation here in Marblehead and they will have the 27 ft prototype done by May. This could be the future of the Volvo, and looks to get the right balance between speed and crew abiility to manage. Check it out. Sure arm chair crowd will have something to say on here, but these guys are doing something pretty cool and they fully admit they have some ideas that may or may not work. Gotta love innovation.


So, which of you guys are which? :D


Nice picture of Brian and Vlad. My name is Bill and unlike many on this forum do not hide my identity to troll posts.

#28 starrchallenge

starrchallenge

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Location:Swampscott, Massachusetts
  • Interests:Still enjoy a nice Mount Gay after a fine day racing Yachts. More time at Sea the better.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 11:08 PM


Just saw Ken Read's post and these guys are very concerned as they see their competitors slow down. Sure this will get a fair bit of attention once race finishes and this post will garner some more input in time from some people that have inside track on what is acceptable design for the Volvo Ocean race. I was merely wondering whether Carbon Fibre has passed the test. Based on what watching it sure seems boys are spending more time fixing the Carbon Yachts than sailing them hard. Why are they falling apart?

Hey YachtDynamics, will be catching up with Brian soon. We share a similar good story as both of us have met women at Maddies. He his 3rd wife! and me my fiance and hopefully only wife. We also share a love of good South African Red Wine. Will pass on regards.


Carbon is good if you do it right ,but maybe a hybrid carbon/Kevlar mix may be good for the impact zone ,probably would have saved Moose's issue with the tear . It is a real worry for the other boats when the sced shows a boat that was next to you has dropped 50 miles and is doing half the speed .Damn you guys are trolling at Maddies ,hope it only after a race or something ,because you don't find good stock there on an off nite ,haha . Yep , I guess Brian has lost his South African upbringing to stick with the first one till she shoots you . Don't do it bro , my dad always said to me if it fucks ,flies or floats rent it ,I didn't believe him and married a commercial pilot and own two boats and they all cost money . South African wine damn that has cost money and many hours to , I built a house in Franschoek a while back which is where a bunch of good wine comes from in SA ,it was pretty good for a short while .Yeh tell that old Jappie bugger I said hey



Good advice from your old man. Will pass on best to Brian. Time to get off SA, the couch Anarchists are annoyed that two people can try and carry on a conversation without having to show their girlfriends tits. Unfortunately sailing is full of idiots and seems SA community supports people being wingnuts. Now I remember why I don't post here anymore. Best mate.



#29 narecet

narecet

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,221 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 11:31 PM

... I don't post here anymore.


Is this like one of those science fiction episodes where, after all else fails, they destroy a dangerous robot with a logically-impossible statement?

#30 sheeting yarns

sheeting yarns

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 388 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 11:39 PM

starrchallenge and Yachtdynamics,
please continue your rants on this thread.
It is a good one for newbs or those completely out of touch with the Volvo Ocean Race.
SY

#31 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 01:21 AM

Amen Star , that's why I lost my original login too ,thought SA had changed though as all thing do when they mature ,but I guess not . But saying that ,thanks to Scott for getting the ball rolling and the trolls will eventually get bored and go hassle someone elseSY ,do yourself a favor and sub to scuttlebutt and a bunch of the other forums mate ,you will get a much better upbringing and a good knowledgable base for your boating education . Even better still ,get out there and sail as much as you can , someone will take notice and you may get a cool payed ride someday ,it's very satisfying and the guys are great solid people you can depend apon to watch your six

#32 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:09 AM

1332749440[/url]' post='3643741']
There is nothing wrong with the Volvo 70 design . Yes there have been brekages on the boats ,The reason it looks worst is because the coverage is better and looks worse than what it is.The whitbread had exactly the same problems but the coverage wasnt available then. Ask any crew that signed up would they change places and the answer would be no. There are more deaths on round the island than the Volvo. One day you will be sailing on a boat that parts have been tested in the Volvo.So stop fucking whinging and harden up you prick.Better still go and have a look at an Open 60 or Volvo and see how they are built, then you just might understand what its all about.And yes I have sailed on both.


All u guys are a crack up ,you are like an idiot that puts his hand down a hole to get whatever's moving inside . @ carbon nit ,I own an open 50 and have worked and sailed on a few Volvo ,Whitbread and solo programs through the years so I have an intimate knowledge of the designs ,build and sailing of the boats ,harden up ,get real man ,when you get close to the hours and miles I have put in come see me we can then probably have a good conversation


So what 50 do you own.intimate knowledge of the designs. Enlighten us ,im sure the designers would love to here this.

#33 Potter

Potter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,016 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 09:25 AM

[/quote]

... Not sure if you are aware of the SpeedDream project to create the world's fastest Monohull. Pretty slick and using wave piercing hull will remove a lot of the loads the current fleet are challenged with. Saw Vlad and Brian give a presentation here in Marblehead and they will have the 27 ft prototype done by May. This could be the future of the Volvo, and looks to get the right balance between speed and crew abiility to manage. Check it out. Sure arm chair crowd will have something to say on here, but these guys are doing something pretty cool and they fully admit they have some ideas that may or may not work. Gotta love innovation.
[/quote]
Yep been watching that , Brian is an old mate and he sends me all the latest on email, we go back to the same crowd in the Atlantic Privateer days even before Drum .It may just be the way to overcome the pounding ,pierce through instead of trying to break it up ,it's getting closer to multi technology or should I say monomaran ,it will be interesting to see how it turns out .I see the talk is now drifting to the loads and how the 70's have more than the 60's , I guess that's why the J133 has more load than the J80 to put it in more understandable terms , you got to love it .
[/quote]

Having worked on a Nigel Irens 100ft wave piercing motorboat I think that it will be a while before we see the wave piercer working properly in big waves. Obviously a motorboat is simpler (steady speed, no mast/keel) but even so the loads as she punched through big waves was not always exactly as expected.

Good Luck to them but I do think it is going to take some time.

#34 yachtyakka

yachtyakka

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 178 posts
  • Location:waiheke, where ever that is

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:52 PM

SpeedDream this link works

facebook link

Keep posting here yacht & starr, those of us that can read understand what you are saying. the fucktards will find another bridge to troll under:blink:

mxNext

#35 clamslapper

clamslapper

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 678 posts
  • Location:Marblehead, MA

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:27 PM

SpeedDream this link works

facebook link

Keep posting here yacht & starr, those of us that can read understand what you are saying. the fucktards will find another bridge to troll under:blink:

mxNext





Seems like a very challenging undertaking. Wave-piercing shapes work well in multihulls, but the crew is of course not behind the part that's doing the wave-piercing! You talk about getting fire-hosed!!!

#36 tekwa

tekwa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 85 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 08:51 PM

It could probably work, also it was posted here few month ago. The problem I see with the concept in terms of racing is, that all box rules or handicaps are limiting LOA quite strictly. Now the designers are triing to make the water think the boat is longer...submersed transoms and blunt bows, while this is doing the oposite. Or not?

#37 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

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

Posted 28 March 2012 - 12:46 AM

Again, regarding the original comment, the following questions are unanswered:

1. Why was Leg 4 "idiotic"?

2. What do the designers have to do with the reduced time between leg 4 finish and Leg 5 start?

3. What specifically do you want changed on the current boats? According to Who's Your Daddy, who seems to know, these boats are built to higher scantlings than Open 60's, so basically you want them to have less rig, right?

#38 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 28 March 2012 - 03:19 AM

1332895609[/url]' post='3646587']
Again, regarding the original comment, the following questions are unanswered:

1. Why was Leg 4 "idiotic"?

2. What do the designers have to do with the reduced time between leg 4 finish and Leg 5 start?

3. What specifically do you want changed on the current boats? According to Who's Your Daddy, who seems to know, these boats are built to higher scantlings than Open 60's, so basically you want them to have less rig, right?


H read the original posting , it's all there , but if you honestly don't understand 1. How many hardcore pro sailors can you get to chuck up ?2.Why do you ask what the designers have to do with the reduced time between legs ? It's got to do with the race organizers 3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

#39 Swanno (Ohf Shore)

Swanno (Ohf Shore)

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,782 posts
  • Location:Perth, Western Australia

Posted 28 March 2012 - 04:31 AM

Speaking of Open 60's

Posted Image

#40 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 28 March 2012 - 09:30 AM

3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

The crews don't want the protection. They have made that clear.
IMOCA rules require ISO 12215 is applied, Volvo 70s require this plus higher panel weights and watertight doors that work in both directions. If IMOCAs require twice as many bulkheads they need 6 of them, or 7 watertight compartments - NO THEY DON'T. What has deck stepped against hull stepped masts got to do with hull scantlings?? And monolithic below waterline!!! Bullshit, pure bullshit. Maybe your old Open 50 has this, but nothing built in the last 15 years has.

#41 clamslapper

clamslapper

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 678 posts
  • Location:Marblehead, MA

Posted 28 March 2012 - 11:07 AM


3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

The crews don't want the protection. They have made that clear.
IMOCA rules require ISO 12215 is applied, Volvo 70s require this plus higher panel weights and watertight doors that work in both directions. If IMOCAs require twice as many bulkheads they need 6 of them, or 7 watertight compartments - NO THEY DON'T. What has deck stepped against hull stepped masts got to do with hull scantlings?? And monolithic below waterline!!! Bullshit, pure bullshit. Maybe your old Open 50 has this, but nothing built in the last 15 years has.




Guys, just to follow this, what exactly is a "scantling"?

#42 narecet

narecet

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,221 posts

Posted 28 March 2012 - 02:12 PM

There are rules or methods devised to figure thickness of construction needed for all parts of a boat structure.

I don't know when, but at some point well back, clever people figured that rather than treating each case individually, we could assign numbers to boats according to their overall size (length, beam, and draft to bottom of hull) and then use rules according to those numbers.

These are scantling numbers.

"Scantlings" refers to construction requirements according to such rules, or these days also according to rules specific for a given type of boat.

#43 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

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

Posted 28 March 2012 - 02:42 PM

then to have a stop of less then a week before the southern ocean leg after the crew where completely depleted from the last idiotic leg


This is why I asked, and yes I was honestly asking. Your title is all about the design, but seem more pissed off about the race management.

Then regarding this:

How many hardcore pro sailors can you get to chuck up ?


What the hell is "chuck up" and what the hell does this even mean? They were getting sea-sick on Leg 4? The more you post, the less sense you make. Leg 4 was a really great race, all boats finished within hours of each other with no major damage to either boats or crew. How is that "idiotic"?

Deck stepped masts are safe, but keel sstepped aren't? Sweet blistering Christ, now you really have jumped the shark. You say you own an Open 50 and sailed a lot in boats like this in the past, but it's hard to square with nonsensical comments like this. If the Volvo sailors are looking for an advocate for safer boats, they need to keep looking.

#44 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 29 March 2012 - 12:06 AM

1332927015[/url]' post='3647146']

1332904782[/url]' post='3646852']
3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

The crews don't want the protection. They have made that clear.
IMOCA rules require ISO 12215 is applied, Volvo 70s require this plus higher panel weights and watertight doors that work in both directions. If IMOCAs require twice as many bulkheads they need 6 of them, or 7 watertight compartments - NO THEY DON'T. What has deck stepped against hull stepped masts got to do with hull scantlings?? And monolithic below waterline!!! Bullshit, pure bullshit. Maybe your old Open 50 has this, but nothing built in the last 15 years has.


Wyd ,you are either very small or disabled as you are a very angry person ,I would suggest anger management classes to start ,then communication skills next Do yourself a favor and instead of trolling the posts here go download the rules for both classes and take a closer look at the definitions ,then go out if you can and try get a tour of both classes ,you will be amazed at what you find . And the monolithic underbody all Finot-Conq imoca60's are monolithic under bodies ,that means the last Hugo Boss in the photo ,as is Lombard Designs and ,Murrey Duvalls latest Carbonic and Acciona that has just been launch . In fact the JK designed Hugo Boss is monolithic in the bow section to as is a multitude of ORMA 60 multi's and most of the maxi multi's . Unfortunately my 50 is cored composite in the bow ,but has a high density core that has not showed any sign of delam .Now that I have given answers to all your stated attacks , I would say you should keep your eye on the ball as you are playing your game on the wrong field .As with Star , I'm done with trying to hold a discussion with guys who think they are getting shot at Safe sailing or trolling or whatever you do for fun

#45 clamslapper

clamslapper

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 678 posts
  • Location:Marblehead, MA

Posted 29 March 2012 - 01:35 AM



3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

The crews don't want the protection. They have made that clear.
IMOCA rules require ISO 12215 is applied, Volvo 70s require this plus higher panel weights and watertight doors that work in both directions. If IMOCAs require twice as many bulkheads they need 6 of them, or 7 watertight compartments - NO THEY DON'T. What has deck stepped against hull stepped masts got to do with hull scantlings?? And monolithic below waterline!!! Bullshit, pure bullshit. Maybe your old Open 50 has this, but nothing built in the last 15 years has.


Wyd ,you are either very small or disabled as you are a very angry person ,I would suggest anger management classes to start ,then communication skills next Do yourself a favor and instead of trolling the posts here go download the rules for both classes and take a closer look at the definitions ,then go out if you can and try get a tour of both classes ,you will be amazed at what you find . And the monolithic underbody all Finot-Conq imoca60's are monolithic under bodies ,that means the last Hugo Boss in the photo ,as is Lombard Designs and ,Murrey Duvalls latest Carbonic and Acciona that has just been launch . In fact the JK designed Hugo Boss is monolithic in the bow section to as is a multitude of ORMA 60 multi's and most of the maxi multi's . Unfortunately my 50 is cored composite in the bow ,but has a high density core that has not showed any sign of delam .Now that I have given answers to all your stated attacks , I would say you should keep your eye on the ball as you are playing your game on the wrong field .As with Star , I'm done with trying to hold a discussion with guys who think they are getting shot at Safe sailing or trolling or whatever you do for fun



Guys can you chill and simplify. What you are discussing is interesting but the way you're going about it is way above my pay grade.

BTW, I should ask you guys while you're discussing this stuff, even though it's a tangent to this thread: why do some of the Open 60s have those "tuna rig" spreaders? Can't figure it out. Also, is Finot strictly an IMOCA shop? ... they don't deal in Open 70s I guess?

#46 Potter

Potter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,016 posts

Posted 29 March 2012 - 07:05 AM

The 'tuna rig' or deck spreaders are due to two things. Firstly a desire to have a rig that rotates through approximately 80 degrees which fixed spreaders would obviously not allow. Secondly to reduce the weight aloft and windage. There are side benefits like sheeting points, but disadvantages as well like sail design being harder to get around the outside of the rigging.
As for the comment about 60s having monolithic hulls,this tends to be the case around the bow and the keel structure but not throughout the entire forward section. Some of the boat yachtdesign mentioned are most definitely nomex core in the forward section.
Finot are like any design house. They will work on anything you pay them to but they have made their international name on imocas. I know that Cammas was thinking of going vplp but decided not to because of timescale.

#47 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 29 March 2012 - 10:02 AM

1332927015[/url]' post='3647146']

1332904782[/url]' post='3646852']
3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

The crews don't want the protection. They have made that clear.
IMOCA rules require ISO 12215 is applied, Volvo 70s require this plus higher panel weights and watertight doors that work in both directions. If IMOCAs require twice as many bulkheads they need 6 of them, or 7 watertight compartments - NO THEY DON'T. What has deck stepped against hull stepped masts got to do with hull scantlings?? And monolithic below waterline!!! Bullshit, pure bullshit. Maybe your old Open 50 has this, but nothing built in the last 15 years has.


Wyd ,you are either very small or disabled as you are a very angry person ,I would suggest anger management classes to start ,then communication skills next Do yourself a favor and instead of trolling the posts here go download the rules for both classes and take a closer look at the definitions ,then go out if you can and try get a tour of both classes ,you will be amazed at what you find . And the monolithic underbody all Finot-Conq imoca60's are monolithic under bodies ,that means the last Hugo Boss in the photo ,as is Lombard Designs and ,Murrey Duvalls latest Carbonic and Acciona that has just been launch . In fact the JK designed Hugo Boss is monolithic in the bow section to as is a multitude of ORMA 60 multi's and most of the maxi multi's . Unfortunately my 50 is cored composite in the bow ,but has a high density core that has not showed any sign of delam .Now that I have given answers to all your stated attacks , I would say you should keep your eye on the ball as you are playing your game on the wrong field .As with Star , I'm done with trying to hold a discussion with guys who think they are getting shot at Safe sailing or trolling or whatever you do for fun

Not small or disabled, and rest assured, I know the rules fairly well.
Some of these boats may have solid laminate around the keel route, but none of the laminate schedules I have seen back you up on it extending more than a metre from that area.
However, I believe the 11.0kg/m2 minimum panel weight in the hull below 300mm above DWL forward of mid ships (MFS) on the Volvo 70 rule (Rule 5.2.1 if you want to look it up) was developed to allow honeycomb, foam or solid laminate to be used at no weight advantage to any option. i.e. You could do a solid laminate at that weight if you wanted. But no one has done it extensively, and those that have had problems with the transition zone.

Now I hope thaht didn't upset anyone

#48 moody frog

moody frog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,665 posts
  • Location:Brittany

Posted 29 March 2012 - 10:32 AM

I think this "seat of the pants" quote fits well in this thread ;)

Ken Read yesterday:

Two things are certainly clear. 1: When conditions warrant, we all have the power to break these boats. No matter who says this or that boat is built to withstand the elements in order to be able to be pushed harder than others, it just isn't true. Believe me, you can't call these boats fragile by any means. In fact, with the torture we put them through, it is simply amazing they are in one piece at all. Every boat is just one bad wave away from being healthy or hurt any boat for that matter, from a 30 weekend cruiser to a Volvo 70. These boats are no exception. Which leads to point 2: We have certainly been calculated, but also lucky. We have caught air on many occasions when it was least expected. The crash that ensues is staggering. Heads pop out of the hatch and a crawling inspection around all the framing begins within minutes. We have been lucky so far. Its like a car crash. You always wonder if it would have happened if you had left the house 5 seconds later or slowed at the orange light when you didn't. We have missed our car crash so far, so our timing has been pretty good. Have I ever mentioned that I knock on wood every time I say stuff like this? Our little piece of wood at the nav station is getting worn out.



#49 rmb

rmb

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts

Posted 29 March 2012 - 04:53 PM




3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

The crews don't want the protection. They have made that clear.
IMOCA rules require ISO 12215 is applied, Volvo 70s require this plus higher panel weights and watertight doors that work in both directions. If IMOCAs require twice as many bulkheads they need 6 of them, or 7 watertight compartments - NO THEY DON'T. What has deck stepped against hull stepped masts got to do with hull scantlings?? And monolithic below waterline!!! Bullshit, pure bullshit. Maybe your old Open 50 has this, but nothing built in the last 15 years has.


Wyd ,you are either very small or disabled as you are a very angry person ,I would suggest anger management classes to start ,then communication skills next Do yourself a favor and instead of trolling the posts here go download the rules for both classes and take a closer look at the definitions ,then go out if you can and try get a tour of both classes ,you will be amazed at what you find . And the monolithic underbody all Finot-Conq imoca60's are monolithic under bodies ,that means the last Hugo Boss in the photo ,as is Lombard Designs and ,Murrey Duvalls latest Carbonic and Acciona that has just been launch . In fact the JK designed Hugo Boss is monolithic in the bow section to as is a multitude of ORMA 60 multi's and most of the maxi multi's . Unfortunately my 50 is cored composite in the bow ,but has a high density core that has not showed any sign of delam .Now that I have given answers to all your stated attacks , I would say you should keep your eye on the ball as you are playing your game on the wrong field .As with Star , I'm done with trying to hold a discussion with guys who think they are getting shot at Safe sailing or trolling or whatever you do for fun

Not small or disabled, and rest assured, I know the rules fairly well.
Some of these boats may have solid laminate around the keel route, but none of the laminate schedules I have seen back you up on it extending more than a metre from that area.
However, I believe the 11.0kg/m2 minimum panel weight in the hull below 300mm above DWL forward of mid ships (MFS) on the Volvo 70 rule (Rule 5.2.1 if you want to look it up) was developed to allow honeycomb, foam or solid laminate to be used at no weight advantage to any option. i.e. You could do a solid laminate at that weight if you wanted. But no one has done it extensively, and those that have had problems with the transition zone.

Now I hope thaht didn't upset anyone



My lombard IMOCA design from 2003 did not have monolithic anywhere in the hull. Nor Did the 2007 Farr IMOCA design that we sailed on. Neither the Orma 60's, MOD 70's, nor Groupama 3 nor Banque Pop 5 are monolithic. As for the Owen clark designs and the Finots I do not know. I think you are a little out of the box with this comment.

#50 Robin Wasa 55

Robin Wasa 55

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 29 March 2012 - 05:38 PM

[/quote]
My lombard IMOCA design from 2003 did not have monolithic anywhere in the hull. Nor Did the 2007 Farr IMOCA design that we sailed on. Neither the Orma 60's, MOD 70's, nor Groupama 3 nor Banque Pop 5 are monolithic. As for the Owen clark designs and the Finots I do not know. I think you are a little out of the box with this comment.
[/quote]

Didnt Groupama 3 change their amas/outer hulls to partially monolithic after they capsized of New Zeeland a few years ago? I seem to remember something like that, and that it was because of slamming? or maybe because of the foils?

But, that doesnt relate all that much to VO 70s anyway:P

#51 Lostmydetailsagain

Lostmydetailsagain

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 305 posts

Posted 29 March 2012 - 06:42 PM

Haven't done any VO70 scantling calculations myself but mr Verdier suggested that the panel weight rule prohibits monolithic structures in the forward slamming area.

I think that Mr. Read makes an excellent point although some of the failures reported from the boats would almost have me question the builders. A big emphasis here on the almost as I don't have accurate information on the failures that warrant judgement of the engineers, builders and sailors. The only thing really left to discuss is whether sending anybody down the Southern Ocean this late in the year can be avoided next time around: the conditions with winter just around the corner are considerably more extreme (especially the confused sea-states experienced) than any other race before (that I can remember, we're almost 6 weeks later than previous Volvo's, close to 3 months later than the Vendee or BWR)



#52 rmb

rmb

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 06:24 AM

[/quote]
My lombard IMOCA design from 2003 did not have monolithic anywhere in the hull. Nor Did the 2007 Farr IMOCA design that we sailed on. Neither the Orma 60's, MOD 70's, nor Groupama 3 nor Banque Pop 5 are monolithic. As for the Owen clark designs and the Finots I do not know. I think you are a little out of the box with this comment.
[/quote]

Didnt Groupama 3 change their amas/outer hulls to partially monolithic after they capsized of New Zeeland a few years ago? I seem to remember something like that, and that it was because of slamming? or maybe because of the foils?

But, that doesnt relate all that much to VO 70s anyway:P
[/quote]

No, they changed them from Nomex honeycomb to high density foam, specifically in the slamming areas.

#53 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 02:09 PM

1333040034[/url]' post='3649284']

1333015375[/url]' post='3648785']

1332979591[/url]' post='3648152']

1332927015[/url]' post='3647146']

1332904782[/url]' post='3646852']
3. Put a deck on that will work for the offshore conditions with proper crew protection not a deck designed to go round the cans ,and no they are not built to higher scantlings , open 60's have twice the amount of watertight bulkheads ,the rigs are deck stepped to stop tearing a hole in the boat when it goes over the side and most of the 60's have monolithic hulls below the waterline to stop any delam from the pounding

The crews don't want the protection. They have made that clear.
IMOCA rules require ISO 12215 is applied, Volvo 70s require this plus higher panel weights and watertight doors that work in both directions. If IMOCAs require twice as many bulkheads they need 6 of them, or 7 watertight compartments - NO THEY DON'T. What has deck stepped against hull stepped masts got to do with hull scantlings?? And monolithic below waterline!!! Bullshit, pure bullshit. Maybe your old Open 50 has this, but nothing built in the last 15 years has.


Wyd ,you are either very small or disabled as you are a very angry person ,I would suggest anger management classes to start ,then communication skills next Do yourself a favor and instead of trolling the posts here go download the rules for both classes and take a closer look at the definitions ,then go out if you can and try get a tour of both classes ,you will be amazed at what you find . And the monolithic underbody all Finot-Conq imoca60's are monolithic under bodies ,that means the last Hugo Boss in the photo ,as is Lombard Designs and ,Murrey Duvalls latest Carbonic and Acciona that has just been launch . In fact the JK designed Hugo Boss is monolithic in the bow section to as is a multitude of ORMA 60 multi's and most of the maxi multi's . Unfortunately my 50 is cored composite in the bow ,but has a high density core that has not showed any sign of delam .Now that I have given answers to all your stated attacks , I would say you should keep your eye on the ball as you are playing your game on the wrong field .As with Star , I'm done with trying to hold a discussion with guys who think they are getting shot at Safe sailing or trolling or whatever you do for fun

Not small or disabled, and rest assured, I know the rules fairly well.
Some of these boats may have solid laminate around the keel route, but none of the laminate schedules I have seen back you up on it extending more than a metre from that area.
However, I believe the 11.0kg/m2 minimum panel weight in the hull below 300mm above DWL forward of mid ships (MFS) on the Volvo 70 rule (Rule 5.2.1 if you want to look it up) was developed to allow honeycomb, foam or solid laminate to be used at no weight advantage to any option. i.e. You could do a solid laminate at that weight if you wanted. But no one has done it extensively, and those that have had problems with the transition zone.

Now I hope thaht didn't upset anyone



My lombard IMOCA design from 2003 did not have monolithic anywhere in the hull. Nor Did the 2007 Farr IMOCA design that we sailed on. Neither the Orma 60's, MOD 70's, nor Groupama 3 nor Banque Pop 5 are monolithic. As for the Owen clark designs and the Finots I do not know. I think you are a little out of the box with this comment.


Ryan,As I said not all of the designs are monolithic ,but quite a few including the new Muuray Duvall and we are getting off the original point about the 70's , so it's not a little out the box .Give my regards to Bilou next time you speak with him . Adonff



#54 Potter

Potter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,016 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 02:40 PM

New Murray design? Are you taking the piss? I can only assume you are talking about the 7 year old Pakea Bizkaia. Using that as an example of an IMOCA 60 is pretty dire. That boat is older that Ryan's Verdier...even though the build was more recent.
It is not really getting away from the central argument, as you have used the IMOCA 60s as examples of boats that have monolithic hulls, but none of the ones you have named so far (apart from maybe the out of date before it was launched Bizkaia) have had monolithic hulls. Certainly Acciona does not.

The issue is not the design rule, it is the choices the teams make. They choose how to fit into the VOR 70 rule (IE do they want to excel in lighter airs) and need to sail the boats with that in mind. Abu Dhabi is a prime example. One day they hit 41.5 knots, and the next they are delaminating...Banque Pop had a (self imposed)maximum speed limit of 40 knots in big seas, that should tell everyone something.

I am not slamming you for asking the question, more for having incorrect facts. THe questions should be asked, but I do not believe that the issue is with the design rule, more with the course and points leading the teams to choose a design that will help them get the most points in other areas of the world. There is only one southern ocean leg and it is relatively few points, so that leads teams to make certain decisions.

#55 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,468 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 04:52 PM

There is only one southern ocean leg and it is relatively few points, so that leads teams to make certain decisions.


It is the premier 'extreme sports' RTW race. The Southern Ocean is the signature of the race. To be consistent with all that I would suggest the southern ocean leg (s) should be heavily weighted in the total points. They can run the in-ports for sponsor entertainment but they really should be very minimal points in this race.

Suggested point allocation
southern ocean 40%
other offshore legs 50%
in-ports 10%

That would change the team's and designers priorities.

But I also think the minimum scantlings need to be beefed up - adding 200kg of hull weight (carbon, and perhaps some foam in slamming areas - rather than nomex) would add a huge amount of extra strength with minimal speed effect.

#56 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 04:59 PM

1333118408[/url]' post='3650584']
New Murray design? Are you taking the piss? I can only assume you are talking about the 7 year old Pakea Bizkaia. Using that as an example of an IMOCA 60 is pretty dire. That boat is older that Ryan's Verdier...even though the build was more recent.
It is not really getting away from the central argument, as you have used the IMOCA 60s as examples of boats that have monolithic hulls, but none of the ones you have named so far (apart from maybe the out of date before it was launched Bizkaia) have had monolithic hulls. Certainly Acciona does not.

The issue is not the design rule, it is the choices the teams make. They choose how to fit into the VOR 70 rule (IE do they want to excel in lighter airs) and need to sail the boats with that in mind. Abu Dhabi is a prime example. One day they hit 41.5 knots, and the next they are delaminating...Banque Pop had a (self imposed)maximum speed limit of 40 knots in big seas, that should tell everyone something.

I am not slamming you for asking the question, more for having incorrect facts. THe questions should be asked, but I do not believe that the issue is with the design rule, more with the course and points leading the teams to choose a design that will help them get the most points in other areas of the world. There is only one southern ocean leg and it is relatively few points, so that leads teams to make certain decisions.


No Potter , the Rich Challenge MBD 60' ,and Acciona does ,look at the Design spec , but as you say this is getting off the subject . The teams choose what they want to do within the design rule , so if you shift the design rule ,then the teams will choose there . Think for a minute how long it takes for these teams to recover from a wipeout and the helmsman getting washed from the wheel ,now add protection for the helmsman like an open 60 and there is a large possibility that he could save the wipeout , this could add up to quite a few miles , now add the possibility that on one of these wipeouts a guy just coming up on deck and not clipped in gets washed over the side , how much longer will that take if at all successful or one of the crew get washed into a board , grinder or steering pedestal and sustains internal injuries or internal bleeding ,how long do you have to get help for that crew member ,in the Southern Ocean ? The possibility of him bleeding out in front of the team who are unable to help due to limited supplies carried , what is that worth ?? It's not about there being one Souther ocean leg ,it's about percentages ,and it's not just that leg , Hans died in the North Atlantic and it can happen on the way to any stop over . Fatigue has a huge roll to play in how quick things are reacted to as well as prudent decision making ,these guys are not supermen that don't get fatigued and the more the design helps to stop the fatigue by offering more protection the more succesful the race is likely to be . It's all in the human factor and if you are to be succesful you need to help the human by any means you can when exposed to such extreme conditions that you get on these guided missiles .

#57 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:11 PM

1333126368[/url]' post='3650786']

1333118408[/url]' post='3650584']
There is only one southern ocean leg and it is relatively few points, so that leads teams to make certain decisions.


It is the premier 'extreme sports' RTW race. The Southern Ocean is the signature of the race. To be consistent with all that I would suggest the southern ocean leg (s) should be heavily weighted in the total points. They can run the in-ports for sponsor entertainment but they really should be very minimal points in this race.

Suggested point allocation
southern ocean 40%
other offshore legs 50%
in-ports 10%

That would change the team's and designers priorities.

But I also think the minimum scantlings need to be beefed up - adding 200kg of hull weight (carbon, and perhaps some foam in slamming areas - rather than nomex) would add a huge amount of extra strength with minimal speed effect.


Amen Evans , That is one way to do it . Glad there are people here that have experienced what it's like down in the cold and have good design sense ,there is to much inexperience of what it's actually like in extreme conditions to be preaching gospel . At the end of the day ,I don't care how it's done , but there is obviously something really wrong with the picture , only 2 of 6 boats still likely to finish ,then we have the upwind leg after hanging a left around the Rock ,maybe then there was one ?

#58 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:36 PM

Foncia cored, Hugo Cored, MOD 70 cored. Show me an Imoca that is not cored or a half decent one anyway. Monolothic is not strong and is heavy. Delam is all to do with how you put down the veil on the core and go from there. I suspect the structural engineers who supplied the materials phone is very hot right now. Stick it back together boy sheer be wright.

#59 Potter

Potter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,016 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:45 PM

My apologies I have never heard of the Rich Challenge boat. Is it still in build?
The only Rich I know is Rich Wilson that had Great American 3 and his boat was designed by Bernard Nivelt I believe.

Sorry again, but I stand by my knowledge of Acciona and OCD. SHe is not momolithic for the whole forward part of the hull, but for the very bow (behind the sacrifical tip) she is.

#60 Samba301

Samba301

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 52 posts
  • Location:Newport, RI

Posted 30 March 2012 - 07:03 PM

My apologies I have never heard of the Rich Challenge boat. Is it still in build?
The only Rich I know is Rich Wilson that had Great American 3 and his boat was designed by Bernard Nivelt I believe.

Sorry again, but I stand by my knowledge of Acciona and OCD. SHe is not momolithic for the whole forward part of the hull, but for the very bow (behind the sacrifical tip) she is.



Yes, it is still in build....they're still trying to find enough carbon to build a monolithic Open 60.....

#61 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,976 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 07:49 PM


My apologies I have never heard of the Rich Challenge boat. Is it still in build?
The only Rich I know is Rich Wilson that had Great American 3 and his boat was designed by Bernard Nivelt I believe.

Sorry again, but I stand by my knowledge of Acciona and OCD. SHe is not momolithic for the whole forward part of the hull, but for the very bow (behind the sacrifical tip) she is.



Yes, it is still in build....they're still trying to find enough carbon to build a monolithic Open 60.....


OK, funny, that's Lot of carbon even if you sub in lower cost kine for monlithic, core is definitely cheaper by volume!

#62 SemiSalt

SemiSalt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,554 posts
  • Location:WLIS

Posted 30 March 2012 - 08:30 PM

Guys, just to follow this, what exactly is a "scantling"?


These exotic raceboats are out on the bleeding edge, and have to be done from first principles. I believe this is done in a general way, and incorporated in the rule. It will all be done over by the designer, of course. With several designers feeding their experience back into the mix, it gets better as it goes along. Designers are not happy when their boats break. It could be a part that needs to be re-designed, or it could be a problem in construction, or it could be an error by crew, or it could be that oft-blamed but never see semi-submerged container that's sunk more boats than Moby Dick.

#63 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 31 March 2012 - 08:15 AM

The designer draws it up as well as the lay up sched, once he gets the information back from the structural enginers who specify what materials are required. Then it goes into build. In the build process things can be changed as long they are passed by the designer and structural engineer. As to breakeges occuring through crew error is very unlikely. As to delamination occuring lets say Abu , I have seen this before in the exact same spot on an Open 40. The cause was the core in the build. Where the builders layed the core down in strips, they did not shampher the edges of the core to lay down on the mould , so when it was under vacuum it compressed down. The core was under pressure ,a lot of pressure to form. When the vacuum was released and the yacht went sailing it popped. The other problem was core to first laminate they did not use a veil cloth on the core for the first layer to consolidate the laminates to the core.The other problem is not having it built resin rich.It could be a duff batch of pre-preg.

#64 tekwa

tekwa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 85 posts

Posted 31 March 2012 - 01:02 PM

The designer draws it up as well as the lay up sched, once he gets the information back from the structural enginers who specify what materials are required. Then it goes into build. In the build process things can be changed as long they are passed by the designer and structural engineer. As to breakeges occuring through crew error is very unlikely. As to delamination occuring lets say Abu , I have seen this before in the exact same spot on an Open 40. The cause was the core in the build. Where the builders layed the core down in strips, they did not shampher the edges of the core to lay down on the mould , so when it was under vacuum it compressed down. The core was under pressure ,a lot of pressure to form. When the vacuum was released and the yacht went sailing it popped. The other problem was core to first laminate they did not use a veil cloth on the core for the first layer to consolidate the laminates to the core.The other problem is not having it built resin rich.It could be a duff batch of pre-preg.



How ironic. Just finished reading Jason Caringhtons "How to build a VO70 properly" article in current Seahorse.
Not blasting him now, core/skin delam "happend" to ABN or Erricson build by Kilian. Its not 70s problem only as well. G3 suffered same when it capsised of NZ or poor old Rosebud. Anyone knows if the failed areas where honeycomb or foam cored?

#65 Carboninit

Carboninit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts

Posted 31 March 2012 - 04:48 PM

With phenolic honeycomb the early stuff didnt have a veil on the faces. If using it now I would always request it comes with a veil . Better consolidation and keeps the resin out the cells = light core. I dont like foam as it has hard and soft patches when laid up. If you ding it ,it will suck up moisture = heavy core + delam.

#66 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

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

Posted 02 April 2012 - 01:20 AM

http://forums.sailin...0

#67 Swanno (Ohf Shore)

Swanno (Ohf Shore)

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,782 posts
  • Location:Perth, Western Australia

Posted 02 April 2012 - 04:49 AM

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=133444&pid=3653556&st=0&#entry3653556


Now where else do I recall a boat getting smooshed side on by a wave?

#68 chic014

chic014

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 162 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 08:04 AM

The new Virbac Paprec 3 designed by Guillaume Verdier has monolithic laminate and stringers in the slamming region. Read the paper:

https://docs.google....pMQc6yzdg&pli=1



"The panel is made of single skin prepreg carbon fibre epoxy and is located between two bulkheads including two top hat stringers"




#69 Merf Owen

Merf Owen

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 02:35 AM

Guys and girls

I try to surf SA Forums as often as I can because there is sometimes some wheat amongst the chaff. There's always entertaining debate and it's interesting to see what the 'grass roots', the sailors are following and 'care about' most.. Sometimes of course there's a great deal of intolerance, but it's an open forum so if you don't like it you can always opt out and not take it too seriously. I only once recall being pissed off and pitching in to head off an un-called for attack on someone whose input I thought was reliable and/or invaluable to sparking debate.

Anyway, this is probably my pitch in for the year. re slamming areas on Volvo 60's and 70's

Re Open 60's, some facts:

OCD: are all Corecell foam in the slamming areas, that includes Acciona and goes right back through our other seven sixties to Kingfisher, although the grade, density and thicknesses have varied boat to boat of course. Never a problem with delam, but it's not the same dynamic as the Volvo 70's - as with many things sometimes it's an unreasonable thing to draw comparisons between classes or even different designs within a class. People, projects, teams often tend to do things for reasons that may not be immediately obvious to outsiders (including other project teams/designers) and there is always the potential for some projects to follow the crowd (fashions in hats as I describe it), be that for the good, or bad. We're always willing to use someone else's good idea, but where applicable we always strive to prove or disprove it for ourselves rather than adopting it blindly.

Farr: Conceptually have always had foam in slamming areas, I can't say if always Corecell, but that's certainly been the foam in some of the boats. Perhaps they sneaked some high density Nomex in some parts forward but it would be a surprise to me if they weren't predominantly foam and 100% sandwich below the waterline forward of the keel.

Finot: Since Giovanni Soldini's boat way back in 97, monolithic, with the exception of Hugo Boss for Alex, which was a collaboration wtih SP Gurit . She's Corecell if my memory is correct. A person from within the project/design team may put me right on that. I didn't take pictures when I had the tour from Alex. When we built the Finot designed Team Group 4 we had to push hard to have Nomex core aft of the keel area as it had been the practice of the Finot office since PERHAPS Cacolac Acquitaine to build monolithic below the waterline from front to back.

Guillaume: All his boats have been monolithic forward of the keel. It's his belief system and their are perfectly good reasons to go that way. It's a choice, but not our choice.

Juan: Pindar (which became Hugo Boss 3) was sandwich, I couldn't say about the Bernard's new boat, but I suspect sandwich - Nomex or foam I wouldn't know for sure.

Marc: He had success with the first Sill which was high density Nomex in the slamming areas and we always considered that a pretty ballsy move given the weight saving available and how low down in the boat it was. I don't know if later versions of Sill/Bonduelle were Nomex or Monolithic but they wouldn't have been foam because these boats (as per Team Group 4 and the three boats that came out of her mould) were built from 120C pre-preg in a female mould at JMV and no foam cores survive that temperature.


That opens another conversation doesn't it? So, it's not easy; there are design, build, philosophy, engineering and material choice issues that can drive the construction of the forward end of the boat. It's not always as simple as one might think why any one designer, or builder for that matter ( it would be in our opinion a brave designer/engineer who forced a builder to change for the first time their methodology and the materials that they know well, in order to facilitate a particular practice and materials they prefer) chooses a particular method/materials to build a boat..


In summary, openly, but rather controversially and of course to some extent with some dissatisfaction I believe the following is true:

1) Designers and engineers continue to learn year after year about slamming effects on high performance sailing boat hulls. It just isn't a simple exercise and the calculation of forces are still not FULLY understood by classification societies, or even the designers of naval vessels, fast attack craft etc who have had far greater budgets and much longer to develop the numerical tools and emperical knowledge than designers of high performance sailboats. Engineers and academics continue to find more about the effects of hydro-elasticity on the pressure fields and peak pressures created by slamming loads on panels and the associated point loadings. Research continues and is funded by national bodies and commercial concerns with means beyond the reach of any single yacht design or engineering house. In addition the manner in which a panel reacts based on the stiffness of the edges (bulkheads, frames, longitudinals or chines) is still the subject of research and recent papers from academia. Like it or lump it we don't know everything and we're pushing the edges of what is possible and obviously the sailors are pushing the edges of the envelope that designers and builders create.

2) Now, in our profession's defence we're not complete numpties either and you should believe I think as I do that none of the designers/engineers of this Volvo are sending their boats out on a Round The World Race having tried to save the last few kg in the hull shell. We all know the history as well as the public does and the mantra that "to win, first you have to finish" is as well known to us as it is to the reader of any sailing website. We do however live in a competitive world and sailors expect their boats to be the fastest in the 0 to 25 knot wind range. More on that below. You may also be surprised to know that in many areas of the boat's design; rudders and slamming areas in particular we certainly well exceed scantlings that would be required by ISO, ABS, Germansker Lloyd etc simply because these would be insufficient in the world of Volvo 70 or Open 60.

3) One reason why is: In SIMPLE terms (please don't attack this attempt to put a very complex subject into layman's English), the pressure/force induced on a body once it's immersed in a liquid is a first order equation. That is, the increase in force is linear to the depth of the body immersed . But the force of driving an Open 60 or Volvo 70 into waves is second order, such that if the relative impact of a boat into a wall of water is 10 kts the force is 10 squared = 100, 20 knots the force is 20 squared = 400, 30 knots, 900 and 40 knots (remember Rob Greenhalgh reported doing 40+ kts on Abu Dhabi - and that doesn't allow for the relative speed/angle of the water that hit the boat) = 1,600.........You can see the challenge here for structural engineers, designers. Sailors want a competitive boat and require it to be fast in moderate conditions, light, low vcg etc. but in these conditions the boat is only doing 15-20 knots. Indeed the average speed of an IMOCA 60 on the Vendee Globe is only 13 kts, but speeds of 30 to 35 kts and then dropping off waves are well documented in this class and all this under pilot which is fearless and doesn't even try to bear down the wave crest (if there even is one).

4) As I heard first hand in Auckland less than a month ago, sailors from numerous teams are well aware that you can break a Volvo 70. They are very fast and force as we see force can be equated in simple terms to boatspeed squared. When that force is applied to a panel, well there are a whole number of variables that are hard to compute: speed of wave, height of wave, relative speed of boat, pressure distribution of the slamming area. Then each panel will react differently based on how it's supported in it's four axis (a simple case) and depending on the longitudinal and transverse curvature. I haven't even begun to cover the variables or the unknowns such as how hydro-elasticity really affects the global and peak panel loads. If the panel has some flex then in the same scenarios this can reduce the overall impact, but increase the local peak pressure) and if a panel is too well supported it can fail by a different method. This was not as well understood even as little as four years ago and research is still going on in this field.

5) Finally: Is what is built what was designed ? - Fibre/resin ratios, porosity, are only two of the many variables in a build process where EVERY boat is a prototype. Fifteen years of going around pre-preg build yards and there are as many different ways that individual technicians have developed to deal with the manufacturing process as there are ways of fairing/painting a boat. Each depends on local manufacturing conditions, experience, budgets, materials and there are always some who will claim their's is the BEST method, but it's unlikely at this level of the sport that any of the guys who work these processes are fools. When it comes to a Volvo or Open 60 is anyone seriously trying to win the last few kg out of the hull shell and trading that off against reliability? I doubt it, because the performance gains just aren't there.


In summary, putting myself on the firing line so to speak.

Designers, engineers and builders don't know everything - absolutely that accounts for some failures, but it's a developing area of the sport and we're not creating VW Golfs here and we don't have anywhere near the time or budget of a an aerospace, production car manufacturer or Formula 1 campaign. How many years, millions of Euros and QA forms do you imagine it took to develop the carbon airframe of a Eurocopter or the latest Sikorsky? These only have to operate in one medium (air) and that's a whole lot better understood than the seas that these boats sail in. Of course we all have to do a professional job, take responsibility for the work we do and hold our hands up if a mistake is made. If a hull, rig or appendage breaks is it reasonable to instantly point at the designer, engineer, product manufacturer, or sailor? Probably yes at least to start with, but be honest, how often is the first point of call the designer alone? Then perhaps someone remembers that maybe the design office didn't engineer their own boat or that there's a builder and a product manufacturer involved in the mix. Lastly someone is sailing the yacht. If the conditions are bad then for the designer it's a saving grace because that's always mentioned and there's some or total allowance given depending on the severity of the conditions.

Designers and engineers make mistakes (that's different from not knowing everything) - we're human, but in my experience QA procedures are very good and if anything it's more likely to be something designers/engineers don't know that catches us out rather than a mistake.

It's hard to know where the limit is and sailors can push over that limit very easily in a modern high performance yacht. You may feel that's an unsatisfactory answer but when you were eighteen you knew taking that corner at sixty was a risk, you did it and you came a cropper - it's a matter of understanding the limits and at sea that's hard too do. It's pitch black, you're doing 20 plus knots and the front has just come through, seas are at 60 degrees to the new wind and you just know that you're treating the boat hard. There's a call to make.

So, sailors make mistakes too and/or they're unlucky sometimes too. They're racing at the limit and sometimes have to look after their machines in the same way as the guys on the Paris-Dakar Rally. This isn't the Monaco Grand Prix with pit lanes out there. I's not even the Le Mans 24 hrs race. In the case of the Vendee Globe it's 28,000 miles non stop and no one has the God given right to finish, never mind get on the podium or win.

Nature is unforgiving and it's not a mistake when after hours of regular controllable slamming the boat suddenly takes off over a wave with no back in it in the dead of night. That's a sailor's/skippers/helmsman's experience that dictates how hard they push but occasionally they can be either lucky or unlucky in the way the boat falls.

If you want a boat that you can't break then in average conditions you're not going to be competitive. It's as simple as that. If sponsors or the media want it another way then you have to change rules and the boat. But speaking as a designer and the skipper of a steel BT Challenge boat who pushed hard and broke a forestay and backstay (at different times, and kept the mast up and finished) I don't have an answer as to how one can design a racing boat that's impossible to break. That animal doesn't exist in my book.


So, what's going wrong with the Volvo 70 and why are we seeing so much damage? Well, in % terms it's not very different I suspect from what we saw in the last Vendee Globe so far as drop out rates/1,000 miles. I don't have an answer for you, only some facts I've provided regarding the original discussions regarding the cores in the bottom of boats along with some input above that I'm sure will spark more debate.


Finally, one could to some extent mitigate the risks in Volvo and IMOCA class by going fully one design (ike a BT boat. However, as I mentioned,. I guarantee you could still break the boat. There would be a price to pay as well if development classes ceased to exist in this risk adverse society. How boring our sport would be without foiling Moths, canting keels and without spin-offs such as PBO rigging and wing sails?


OK, this has taken far too long and this is my contribution for the year.....let loose the dogs of war and maybe I'll take a breath at some point and come back and read the thread after this.


Good sailing all in 2012.


If any of you are about at the start of the Atlantic Race in Charleston or at the Stopover in New York I hope to meet you there.


Merf

#70 DickDastardly

DickDastardly

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,640 posts
  • Location:Syderney

Posted 05 April 2012 - 03:05 AM

Great post Merf, thanks!

You indirectly raise what you might call the "America's Cup" question in another context. As you say, forces are second order as a function of velocity and the related accelerations, so old style IOR monsters rolling their way around the world rarely hitting 20 knots let alone 30 wouldn't have been subject to anywhere near the same hull skin loads as VO70s, though of course their rig loads might have been higher. I say might have, as I suspect the difference isn't as large as we might imagine due to the much higher decelerations the VO70s would likely experience hitting waves at high speeds.

Surely a moot question here is "Would the VOR be any less of a spectacle to a non-sailing audience - which is what the sponsors want, if the boats were travelling 50% slower?" Would the on-board video be any less spectacular? Would the MCM reports, images and footage be any less interesting? Arguably the purveyors of web site banner ads and media hits would even prefer a race with longer legs. Same as the AC - "Will match racing giant wingsailed cats be any more compelling than watching V5 AC boats locked in mortal combat at close range?" As a TV spectacle I didn't find Godzilla V A5 particularly compelling - the sense of speed and technological wonder is completely lost to a distant viewer.

There's always been a huge tendency to push the envelope in terms of technology in our sport, and as you say it's ultra cool that wing Moths and V70s and all the rest exist. The industry does well out of promulgating all this new technology and obsolescence, but is it actually making the sport more successful or accessible? Is this technology chase actually making the sport less sustainable? Is the sport at risk of killing itself through upping the tech ante in the interests of the professions attached to it without actually generating much in the way of a better commercial bottom line to the funders of the sport or a better spectacle for the viewing public? If you believe F1 has it right than perhaps there's a lesson there for sailing?

#71 Left Hook

Left Hook

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,315 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 03:17 AM

Guys and girls

/snip for sanity


Merf


Great post Merf!

But remember about SA...




Edit: I look forward to meeting you at the Atlantic Cup race stopover in NYC.

#72 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 06:57 AM

Awesome shot Merf ,your a digger mate!I was hoping for some good replies like yours when I started the post ,but instead I got the Trolls who think its a personal attack aimed at their grandmothers or something .
I don't believe that the box rule the boats are designed and built to have the sailors safety at the top of the list . I believe if they gave the crew more protection from the elements like the Imoca 60 's have there would be less fatigue and with less fatigue comes sharper reflexes and reaction time ,also fast critical decision making ,which in its self can save a boat numerous times in a long race . The fact I was trying to discuss was the China Auckland leg was a killer upwind leg taking longer than planned and making most of the crews sick for days on end , this takes a bunch out of them ,not to mention the caloric intake being less then their output .Arriving depleated and fatigued with just 4 days to prep for the worst and most dangerous of all the legs ,then add some cold to burn even more calories and you are seriously putting people at risk of having a catastrophic occurrence .I am full aware that the show must go on , but a postponement would have maybe balanced the large imbalance and maybe less damage would have occurred due to crews being sharper to react to falling off the backside of a wave . The other thing that worries me is how late they are pushing the southern ocean leg this race ,and as you are aware the seasons change real quick down there .
As with you I don't have the answers ,but I am quite aware that there is something very wrong with this formula and something needs to be done about it . I am glad to see Knut has finally made it public that he is worried about it as well . We stand to loose even more if we carry on with this formula as every one of the corporate sponsors have had to throw more money into this race due to the carnage that is happening and I'm sure the budgets are going over what was originally planned .Would another 100 Kg's of extra structure slow these boats down significantly ,my guess is maybe in the short term , but just think of the time it would save not having to throttle back because the boat is breaking apart ,having to go back to pick someone up that was washed overboard ,having to go into some port to get repairs of getting shipped to the next port or even worse loosing a crew member to being flushed or worse still dying on the boat due to internal injuries and no way to treat him or get him help .Merf ,I'm sure you remember the rule changes in the Imoca class after the carnage in the old days , this was a great change bringing about better designed boats for the purpose of single handed abuse ,the same happened in Formula 1 a little to late for a lot of drivers , but safety became the number one priority and the cars where much better . I hope a change comes for the better of the sport but moreso for the crews willing to be out there doing it .Merf ,Good luck on the M2O mate , glad to see you still willing to tear it up , I was trying to get my stuff together to do it on my 50 ,but other priorities have come up ,always wanted to give it a go ,it looks like a killer .


#73 Who's your daddy

Who's your daddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 07:37 AM

I don't believe that the box rule the boats are designed and built to have the sailors safety at the top of the list .

Would another 100 Kg's of extra structure slow these boats down significantly ,my guess is maybe in the short term , but just think of the time it would save not having to throttle back because the boat is breaking apart


I can assure you that safety was at the VERY TOP of the list. The rule book would be one quarter of the size without safety rules. With a sponsor like Volvo there is simply no other approach they would accept.

Would another 100kgs of extra structure make them any stronger? Not necessarily, and it definitely wouldn't be enough to mean they don't need to throttle back. As Merf points out, the best way to make the boats as indestructable as possible is to slow them right down so the loads are reduced. Is that what you want? If so then steel boats and a speed limit of 15 knots for the next race. I know I won't be watching that option.

As noted before, crew protection is the sailors choice. It can be removeable so not there for measurement, in port races and legs they don't need it. Since Australia Challenged/Brunel no one has gone down that road. The sailors have made their choice.

This is sport. If they didn't push it we wouldn't be interested, and it would just be a round the world cruise.

#74 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,194 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 05 April 2012 - 04:09 PM

The fundamental design tool is the VPP.
Add 100 Kg of structure to the bow and the VPP will tell you that it would not be worth entering, you will lose every leg.
A friend of mine was doing FEA work for a team several cycles ago, and recommended about 10kg of extra tabbing and doublers in the keel canting foundations. This is down low in the middle of a 70' boat probably within 2 meters of the center of gravity.

What would have been a no brainer to most of us required a full team meeting to determine if this was "too big a sacrifice" in the boats performance because some of that 10kg was going to have to come from the bulb keel and the VPP hated it. Ultimately the team decided to turn down the water maker and install the tabbing. But this demonstrates how modern design tools can lead teams into making decisions.

The illusion of certainty and certainty are very different things. Performance prediction is enormously complicated and is not as authoritative as we are told. Every design firm has their own algorithms and can get very different results from changes in variables. FEA requires accurate understanding of the load cases, which in a confused seaway seem almost entirely chaotic. If you tune your structures very close to these models, they will be very efficient until a load appears that hasn't been predicted, and then you will break.

One hopes that events like the America's Cup and Volvo Ocean Race are laboratories that refine these tools and improve the breed.
SHC

#75 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,976 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 05:36 PM

I am grateful to Clark and Owen for their postings and the good, solid information. The increased reliance on modeling has had some foreseeable and unforeseeable consequences, and represents a shift away from a more experiential approach due to the assumptions inherent in any simplifying exercise, as noted. We see this in all walks of life today, yacht design is no different.

I think that experience and judgement are often outstripped by innovation today. There has been a bit of chatter about what has changed in the rule, but all acknowledge that the boats are faster every cycle, the records get pushed up along with the averages. Inevitably teams will therefore face new situations even with a static rule. This is akin to the simple question most of us have faced of when to change down from the #1: and we have all probably been guilty of exceeding recommended limits for the sake of competitive advantage, much to the dismay and profit of sailmakers.

What strikes me as new this cycle is the accelerating trend to reduce stretch out of the structures, couple that with a longer duration in more rough upwind legs, and a later, equinoctal transit of the Southern Ocean (good points about more close reaching to avoid ice), and bows and structures optimized for offwind planing (where the gains are more dramatic) and I think that pretty much gets us to now.

#76 owe.jessen

owe.jessen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 413 posts
  • Location:Kiel

Posted 05 April 2012 - 06:38 PM

So I take from this discussion that a problem might be an overconfidence in the models used for design. I really wonder how much of a risk margin designers include into building nowadays, and after Merv's post I wonder if old rules of risk margin are not obsolete because of the unpredictable load peaks.

#77 Mud sailor

Mud sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 509 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 08:46 PM

In the past there was both error in the loads models and an error from the 'calculated properties' to the real properties, both were covered by a safety factor (fudge factor!) applied to the design. Nowadays I wonder if designers/builders are reducing the safety factor as techniques improve, and are finding that maybe build techniques have not improved as much as they thought........

#78 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

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

Posted 05 April 2012 - 10:03 PM

The fundamental design tool is the VPP.
Add 100 Kg of structure to the bow and the VPP will tell you that it would not be worth entering, you will lose every leg.
A friend of mine was doing FEA work for a team several cycles ago, and recommended about 10kg of extra tabbing and doublers in the keel canting foundations. This is down low in the middle of a 70' boat probably within 2 meters of the center of gravity.

What would have been a no brainer to most of us required a full team meeting to determine if this was "too big a sacrifice" in the boats performance because some of that 10kg was going to have to come from the bulb keel and the VPP hated it. Ultimately the team decided to turn down the water maker and install the tabbing. But this demonstrates how modern design tools can lead teams into making decisions.

The illusion of certainty and certainty are very different things. Performance prediction is enormously complicated and is not as authoritative as we are told. Every design firm has their own algorithms and can get very different results from changes in variables. FEA requires accurate understanding of the load cases, which in a confused seaway seem almost entirely chaotic. If you tune your structures very close to these models, they will be very efficient until a load appears that hasn't been predicted, and then you will break.

One hopes that events like the America's Cup and Volvo Ocean Race are laboratories that refine these tools and improve the breed.
SHC


Commenting to SHC but also to Bruno, the scenario you discuss may have been valid for the previous versions of the race, but it is notably less so now. The bulb mass is limited, you cannot shift the mass saved in structure into the bulb. Nor the keel fin. So, with all due respect, the input you are offering, depends on your VO70 rules knowledge getting a little tuning.

The Merf Owen post is great. Points out clearly that we don't know all we could, that any boat can be broken, and that the reason why is because there is no commercial imperative (as with say commercial aircraft) to do otherwise.

#79 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,194 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 05 April 2012 - 10:58 PM

Doug, I understand that the ballast issue is tightened up. So then the question becomes on of centralizing weight in the hull and reducing weight aloft.
In fact the whole V70 rule seems very exhaustive and intended to build vessels worthy of this challenge. So it is kind of shocking when they aren't. Given what looks like the highest quality build standards and leading yacht engineering, one wonders what they haven't got right. From my perspective it seems that these boats are closely engineered for operating conditions that are clearly less challenging than they see in the real world. As such designers have to revisit their guiding assumptions and refine their understanding

Bow structures in any race boat will be built to the minimum acceptable factors of safety because everyone knows that weight forward is bad. How bad will depend on how you VPP is tuned. So the assumptions built into the VPP drive how aggressively the bow will be engineered, and in turn what performance penalty is implicit in a certain Factor of Safety. By reducing the FOS from 1.5 to 1.4 the VPP may say the boat will be 2 seconds per mile faster, and this may seem like an acceptable risk when it isn't.

Similarly, weight aloft will never make a boat faster, so rigs will be always treated as prime targets for weight reduction. The Volvo Ocean Race tries to limit the costs by mandating how many sails can be used and how many days boats may be sailed in training. I wonder if this has the effect of lowering the quality of boat preparation by reducing the amount of sea trials that can be used to qualify new materials or techniques. So the boats are putting to sea less well sorted than you might like, thus making the event more dangerous than it might be. Unintended consequences are Murphy's core competency.
SHC

#80 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

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

Posted 05 April 2012 - 11:28 PM

Doug, I understand that the ballast issue is tightened up. So then the question becomes on of centralizing weight in the hull and reducing weight aloft.
In fact the whole V70 rule seems very exhaustive and intended to build vessels worthy of this challenge. So it is kind of shocking when they aren't. Given what looks like the highest quality build standards and leading yacht engineering, one wonders what they haven't got right. From my perspective it seems that these boats are closely engineered for operating conditions that are clearly less challenging than they see in the real world. As such designers have to revisit their guiding assumptions and refine their understanding

Bow structures in any race boat will be built to the minimum acceptable factors of safety because everyone knows that weight forward is bad. How bad will depend on how you VPP is tuned. So the assumptions built into the VPP drive how aggressively the bow will be engineered, and in turn what performance penalty is implicit in a certain Factor of Safety. By reducing the FOS from 1.5 to 1.4 the VPP may say the boat will be 2 seconds per mile faster, and this may seem like an acceptable risk when it isn't.

Similarly, weight aloft will never make a boat faster, so rigs will be always treated as prime targets for weight reduction. The Volvo Ocean Race tries to limit the costs by mandating how many sails can be used and how many days boats may be sailed in training. I wonder if this has the effect of lowering the quality of boat preparation by reducing the amount of sea trials that can be used to qualify new materials or techniques. So the boats are putting to sea less well sorted than you might like, thus making the event more dangerous than it might be. Unintended consequences are Murphy's core competency.
SHC

Everything you write is true. But again, picking on one aspect: weight aloft, at least from a rig perspective, it is fixed, as is its VCG. The question becomes, how does one distribute the structural composite budget available. This with the presumption that the total amount of mass available for hull construction is sufficient to make a "good" or "solid" boat. Yes in fact there will be real advantages to centralizing that weight in the boat close to its CG.

But I think that the comments of Merf Owen are closer to what we have seen in Leg 5. (All hull structural damage on legs 1-5 has been accounted for by UFO's, AFAIK.) Point one, we do not know everything about the loads, nor the shocks on the system that dynamics create (to varying outcomes depending on the materials involved). Two, any boat can be broken. I worked once with a great guy from High Modulus. His answer to a broken part "the experienced load has exceeded the capacity of the part". Duh.

The leg 5 has shown us that in the washing machine, if you think your boat is tested, think again. It can be argued if hubris, in a word, is what is wrong with the VOR. Note that that comment applies equally to designers/engineers as to sailors.

<edit>I realize I did not reply so much to your comment. It is late here. The VPP is an imperfect tool. Like them all. It can be too much of a good thing, or TMI as well. I think it comes down to what the challenge is regarded as - blasting through any ocean full tilt, or winning the VOR with its many light wind patches - and what acceptable refers to. If it is acceptable to damage the bow, repair, and as we see right now, challenge for first in the leg, well there you have your answer don't you.</edit>

#81 PonderousPelican

PonderousPelican

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 96 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 12:10 AM



Bow structures in any race boat will be built to the minimum acceptable factors of safety because everyone knows that weight forward is bad. How bad will depend on how you VPP is tuned.
SHC

Everything you write is true. But again, picking on one aspect: weight aloft, at least from a rig perspective, it is fixed, as is its VCG.


Help a poor clueless aero guy. What's vpp? What's vcg?

Ponderous (define on first reference) Pelican

#82 rule69

rule69

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,674 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 12:21 AM

VPP = velocity prediction program
VCG = vertical center of gravity

#83 PonderousPelican

PonderousPelican

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 96 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 12:22 AM

VPP = velocity prediction program
VCG = vertical center of gravity


Thank you.

#84 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 03:08 AM

1333666726[/url]' post='3659910']
Doug, I understand that the ballast issue is tightened up. So then the question becomes on of centralizing weight in the hull and reducing weight aloft.
In fact the whole V70 rule seems very exhaustive and intended to build vessels worthy of this challenge. So it is kind of shocking when they aren't. Given what looks like the highest quality build standards and leading yacht engineering, one wonders what they haven't got right. From my perspective it seems that these boats are closely engineered for operating conditions that are clearly less challenging than they see in the real world. As such designers have to revisit their guiding assumptions and refine their understanding

Bow structures in any race boat will be built to the minimum acceptable factors of safety because everyone knows that weight forward is bad. How bad will depend on how you VPP is tuned. So the assumptions built into the VPP drive how aggressively the bow will be engineered, and in turn what performance penalty is implicit in a certain Factor of Safety. By reducing the FOS from 1.5 to 1.4 the VPP may say the boat will be 2 seconds per mile faster, and this may seem like an acceptable risk when it isn't.

Similarly, weight aloft will never make a boat faster, so rigs will be always treated as prime targets for weight reduction. The Volvo Ocean Race tries to limit the costs by mandating how many sails can be used and how many days boats may be sailed in training. I wonder if this has the effect of lowering the quality of boat preparation by reducing the amount of sea trials that can be used to qualify new materials or techniques. So the boats are putting to sea less well sorted than you might like, thus making the event more dangerous than it might be. Unintended consequences are Murphy's core competency.
SHC


At last , great guys with good discussional topics , thanks Steve for your input , it's always appreciated like with Merf . I'm glad to see people thinking objectively .

#85 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 03:09 AM

1333668520[/url]' post='3659952']

1333666726[/url]' post='3659910']
Doug, I understand that the ballast issue is tightened up. So then the question becomes on of centralizing weight in the hull and reducing weight aloft.
In fact the whole V70 rule seems very exhaustive and intended to build vessels worthy of this challenge. So it is kind of shocking when they aren't. Given what looks like the highest quality build standards and leading yacht engineering, one wonders what they haven't got right. From my perspective it seems that these boats are closely engineered for operating conditions that are clearly less challenging than they see in the real world. As such designers have to revisit their guiding assumptions and refine their understanding

Bow structures in any race boat will be built to the minimum acceptable factors of safety because everyone knows that weight forward is bad. How bad will depend on how you VPP is tuned. So the assumptions built into the VPP drive how aggressively the bow will be engineered, and in turn what performance penalty is implicit in a certain Factor of Safety. By reducing the FOS from 1.5 to 1.4 the VPP may say the boat will be 2 seconds per mile faster, and this may seem like an acceptable risk when it isn't.

Similarly, weight aloft will never make a boat faster, so rigs will be always treated as prime targets for weight reduction. The Volvo Ocean Race tries to limit the costs by mandating how many sails can be used and how many days boats may be sailed in training. I wonder if this has the effect of lowering the quality of boat preparation by reducing the amount of sea trials that can be used to qualify new materials or techniques. So the boats are putting to sea less well sorted than you might like, thus making the event more dangerous than it might be. Unintended consequences are Murphy's core competency.
SHC

Everything you write is true. But again, picking on one aspect: weight aloft, at least from a rig perspective, it is fixed, as is its VCG. The question becomes, how does one distribute the structural composite budget available. This with the presumption that the total amount of mass available for hull construction is sufficient to make a "good" or "solid" boat. Yes in fact there will be real advantages to centralizing that weight in the boat close to its CG.

But I think that the comments of Merf Owen are closer to what we have seen in Leg 5. (All hull structural damage on legs 1-5 has been accounted for by UFO's, AFAIK.) Point one, we do not know everything about the loads, nor the shocks on the system that dynamics create (to varying outcomes depending on the materials involved). Two, any boat can be broken. I worked once with a great guy from High Modulus. His answer to a broken part "the experienced load has exceeded the capacity of the part". Duh.

The leg 5 has shown us that in the washing machine, if you think your boat is tested, think again. It can be argued if hubris, in a word, is what is wrong with the VOR. Note that that comment applies equally to designers/engineers as to sailors.

<edit>I realize I did not reply so much to your comment. It is late here. The VPP is an imperfect tool. Like them all. It can be too much of a good thing, or TMI as well. I think it comes down to what the challenge is regarded as - blasting through any ocean full tilt, or winning the VOR with its many light wind patches - and what acceptable refers to. If it is acceptable to damage the bow, repair, and as we see right now, challenge for first in the leg, well there you have your answer don't you.</edit>


Doug thanks for your input too , it is I am sure appreciated by a bunch of people here

#86 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

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

Posted 06 April 2012 - 04:19 AM

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?

#87 owe.jessen

owe.jessen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 413 posts
  • Location:Kiel

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:29 AM

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?


So what, maybe he is more interested in learning something than in being right?

#88 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

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

Posted 06 April 2012 - 03:49 PM


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?


So what, maybe he is more interested in learning something than in being right?


Plenty of people were trying to tell him exactly what they said, and all he could do was throw insults and call people trolls. Did you even read his first post? So no, he isn't "more interested in learning something than in being right". Look at the title, "idiotic inshore design", plenty of people cited the VOR rule and how it exceeded most offshore boats, and exceeded most previous boats. That any yacht can be broken by the wrong conditions or pushing too hard.

He wouldn't have any of it.

#89 mr_ryano

mr_ryano

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,967 posts
  • Location:Southeast of Disorder

Posted 06 April 2012 - 05:45 PM

If anyone actually cares what the design rule says, it's open to the public here.

By reading these posts, an uneducated person would think that every boat is on the verge of falling apart. To the best of my knowledge, 4 boats have had panel failure issues. Groupama, CAMPER, Tele, and ADOR. I'm not counting Sanya in leg 1 as that seemed to be a UFO hit. Groupama first had some issues in leg 2A, the in the final miles of leg 4. In both cases they finished, and in the case of leg 4, the damage may have been due to a UFO. Of the damage in leg 5, each team was doing the best they could to throttle back. In any other leg, they never would have been in the conditions that caused the failure in the first place, but the location of the ice gates forced each team to sail through the worst of Southern Ocean storms. Making matters worse, the boats keep up with the storm. In a VO 60, you would have been through the worst of it in 24-36 hrs. These 70's are riding the same mess for days, with nowhere to hide. Same was true last race going to Qindgdao. Engineering only works when common sense is involved. Common sense needs to come from organizers, design teams, build teams, and sailing teams. In the case of Leg 5, there were few common sense options left to the teams once they had to sail along the ice line. If you read the blogs from ADOR, they were doing everything they could to keep the loads in check, but got caught in "the one". Panel delimitation is nothing new in the Whitbred/Volvo. It happened on the kevlar 60's just as much as it does now on the 70's.

As Merf said so well, no design tool can predict every worst case dynamic load. 100Kg of extra material likely wouldn't have saved ADOR or CAMPER. Being able to avoid the worst of the sea state would. The biggest change for the next race really ought to be the removal of the ice gates

#90 Yachtdynamics

Yachtdynamics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 06:04 PM

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

#91 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,194 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:44 PM

Schadenfreude Moment:
"According to Shaughnessy the weight limits that were once difficult to achieve during the build
of VO70s are now easy to reach. "Last time you were working out how to subtract and how you
could whittle things down, whereas now the challenge is how you are going to spend the rest of
the weight you have left over. The games now are more about how you optimise your centre of
gravity, how you reduce windage and manage water and air, etc. And on the engineering side
where you were trying to chase minimum weight, now you are trying to produce structures that
are more forgiving and easier to use for the crews, because the weights are so achievable."

http://www.farrdesig...l_03Nov2011.pdf

Without picking on anyone, might I suggest heavier/ higher sheer core in the bow panels, and perhaps another ply of 300 g biax per side as a good starting place.
Sorry.
SJC

#92 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,037 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:59 PM

^Posted Image

Wondering if they couldn't put accelerometers /data loggers on the boat, and put instantaneous G limits in the rules. Like the Red Bull air races - go over X G, get points deducted. Might mean that you're not always pushing to the limit, with the limit being where the boat breaks.

#93 RedFlag

RedFlag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:12 PM

Just a short precision on Merf's post (What an essay ! Congrats !) :

- JK's Hugo Boss is "normal" Nomex. No slamming zone... Which explains a lot, doesn't it ?
- Bernard's JK boat is aluminum honeycomb in the slamming zone !
- Finot's Hugo Boss is indeed Corecell.
- Farr's Foncia (structures by HDS) is Airex R63. I -think- so are the Farr-designed structures, but that more speculative.

TIA

Well, not exactly...

There are two ways of seing things, I think :
Taking out of the equation the fact that, yes, definitely, there will always be conditions where a boat will end up breaking...
If a boat doesn't break, some will consider it was properly engineered. Others will say it's too heavy... I know sailors in both camps...

And a last thing :

It seems to me that safety factors on loads are not being reduced. Loads are -somewhat- better understood, but it doesn't really lead to reducing the scantlings. Maybe redistributing a bit...
On the other hand, the provision on materials properties that used to be used to account for manufacturing imperfections tends to disappear.
Is it really reasonnable when structural engineers explain that a boat can break because there's a 1mm gap between two rolls of carbon UD, which creates micro-buckling of the next layer ?
Or when some yacht designer counts on the vaccum in the honeycomb cells to compensate for no glue film (OK, this one's downright stupid, but it's a true story !) ?

In other words, I think the expectations on manufacturing are getting unreasonnable. Especially when the VO70 rule prevents using the better manufacturing methods (high temp resins, autoclave, etc...)

#94 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

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

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:15 PM

Schadenfreude Moment:
"According to Shaughnessy the weight limits that were once difficult to achieve during the build
of VO70s are now easy to reach. "Last time you were working out how to subtract and how you
could whittle things down, whereas now the challenge is how you are going to spend the rest of
the weight you have left over. The games now are more about how you optimise your centre of
gravity, how you reduce windage and manage water and air, etc. And on the engineering side
where you were trying to chase minimum weight, now you are trying to produce structures that
are more forgiving and easier to use for the crews, because the weights are so achievable."

http://www.farrdesig...l_03Nov2011.pdf

Without picking on anyone, might I suggest heavier/ higher sheer core in the bow panels, and perhaps another ply of 300 g biax per side as a good starting place.
Sorry.
SJC


Good quote. Don't know what the apology is all about. I think your fix is a bit off the cuff. Tele looks like they broke an inside skin rather than suffered core shear failure. Pretty small panel in the bow.

I will point out that ADOR did not damage the bow shell at all. Care to make a guess what the core in the damaged area of Azzam is? Listening to the boat captain's recent video where he describes the need to form the honeycomb, there is no doubt in my mind (nor was there before) that they have used aramid N636 honeycomb such as this. I am thinking that it ought to be 72 kg/m3 nominal density. I can't imagine a thickness less than 30 mm, but maybe. It is pretty amazing strong stuff in shear, and not that easy to work with. It really resists so much that it has to be heated to be set in a shape, but not too much, mind you.

Forward of the mast they will have used a high elongation foam like Corecell P grade, maybe 120 but more probably 150 kg/m3. Personally looking around the inside in the pics, I would say Azzam probably sheared the core of one of the largest panels. Maybe a frame makes as much or more sense than heavier core and a biax.

Saw a picture and movie of the work in Camper today, they are undertaking a massive job, having removed a lot of the structure.

#95 RedFlag

RedFlag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:16 PM

^Posted Image

Wondering if they couldn't put accelerometers /data loggers on the boat, and put instantaneous G limits in the rules. Like the Red Bull air races - go over X G, get points deducted. Might mean that you're not always pushing to the limit, with the limit being where the boat breaks.


I remember reading on their website that it's been done as early as 2000 by Finot during the Vendee Globe. For recording purposes, not limitation.
I'm sure others did the same since (and also probably before).

#96 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

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

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:37 PM

Just a short precision on Merf's post (What an essay ! Congrats !) :

- JK's Hugo Boss is "normal" Nomex. No slamming zone... Which explains a lot, doesn't it ?
- Bernard's JK boat is aluminum honeycomb in the slamming zone !
- Finot's Hugo Boss is indeed Corecell.
- Farr's Foncia (structures by HDS) is Airex R63. I -think- so are the Farr-designed structures, but that more speculative.

TIA

Well, not exactly...

There are two ways of seing things, I think :
Taking out of the equation the fact that, yes, definitely, there will always be conditions where a boat will end up breaking...
If a boat doesn't break, some will consider it was properly engineered. Others will say it's too heavy... I know sailors in both camps...

And a last thing :

It seems to me that safety factors on loads are not being reduced. Loads are -somewhat- better understood, but it doesn't really lead to reducing the scantlings. Maybe redistributing a bit...
On the other hand, the provision on materials properties that used to be used to account for manufacturing imperfections tends to disappear.
Is it really reasonnable when structural engineers explain that a boat can break because there's a 1mm gap between two rolls of carbon UD, which creates micro-buckling of the next layer ?
Or when some yacht designer counts on the vaccum in the honeycomb cells to compensate for no glue film (OK, this one's downright stupid, but it's a true story !) ?

In other words, I think the expectations on manufacturing are getting unreasonnable. Especially when the VO70 rule prevents using the better manufacturing methods (high temp resins, autoclave, etc...)

I take your meaning with manufacturing. We have just built a very radical 13m wide mono with the "better manufacturing methods" you discuss. Every component of the boat was autoclave cured, with fibre and resins that boatbuilders normally cannot use. Well, SHC will have used them in the LAC. And the same type of cores mentioned in my previous post. It is still a challenge, I think you may remove some problems but create new ones. We are satisfied but cautious with the outcome. I will say that IMHO it would not help the VO70 fleet much at all. Technically one problem is that the skins are much thinner, making them prone to all kinds of things. Dropping a toolbox is a no no! That has less relevance on a C class cat. But, really, it would explode the costs. There are perhaps, I am guessing 3, autoclaves world wide that could do a VO70, if that. Steve do you know? A ton of energy to heat those big ones. Carbon moulds for everything, ones capable of 5 atm. Nobody would take part in the race if that were the tech.

#97 RedFlag

RedFlag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:38 PM


Schadenfreude Moment:
"According to Shaughnessy the weight limits that were once difficult to achieve during the build
of VO70s are now easy to reach. "Last time you were working out how to subtract and how you
could whittle things down, whereas now the challenge is how you are going to spend the rest of
the weight you have left over. The games now are more about how you optimise your centre of
gravity, how you reduce windage and manage water and air, etc. And on the engineering side
where you were trying to chase minimum weight, now you are trying to produce structures that
are more forgiving and easier to use for the crews, because the weights are so achievable."

http://www.farrdesig...l_03Nov2011.pdf

Without picking on anyone, might I suggest heavier/ higher sheer core in the bow panels, and perhaps another ply of 300 g biax per side as a good starting place.
Sorry.
SJC


Good quote. Don't know what the apology is all about. I think your fix is a bit off the cuff. Tele looks like they broke an inside skin rather than suffered core shear failure. Pretty small panel in the bow.

I will point out that ADOR did not damage the bow shell at all. Care to make a guess what the core in the damaged area of Azzam is? Listening to the boat captain's recent video where he describes the need to form the honeycomb, there is no doubt in my mind (nor was there before) that they have used aramid N636 honeycomb such as this. I am thinking that it ought to be 72 kg/m3 nominal density. I can't imagine a thickness less than 30 mm, but maybe. It is pretty amazing strong stuff in shear, and not that easy to work with. It really resists so much that it has to be heated to be set in a shape, but not too much, mind you.

Forward of the mast they will have used a high elongation foam like Corecell P grade, maybe 120 but more probably 150 kg/m3. Personally looking around the inside in the pics, I would say Azzam probably sheared the core of one of the largest panels. Maybe a frame makes as much or more sense than heavier core and a biax.

Saw a picture and movie of the work in Camper today, they are undertaking a massive job, having removed a lot of the structure.


I have good reasons to believe that in the previous edition, the VO70's that had foam in their slamming area used Corecell P in 100kg/m3 only !!! Not sure what they use this time...
And there are some of the current VO70's that don't have foam in the slamming zone. Kevlar honeycomb throughout ! Very brittle...
The guys use the rule's minimum panel wieght to increase the stiffness of the boat, not the strength of the panels.

#98 RedFlag

RedFlag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:42 PM

I take your meaning with manufacturing. We have just built a very radical 13m wide mono with the "better manufacturing methods" you discuss. Every component of the boat was autoclave cured, with fibre and resins that boatbuilders normally cannot use. Well, SHC will have used them in the LAC. And the same type of cores mentioned in my previous post. It is still a challenge, I think you may remove some problems but create new ones. We are satisfied but cautious with the outcome. I will say that IMHO it would not help the VO70 fleet much at all. Technically one problem is that the skins are much thinner, making them prone to all kinds of things. Dropping a toolbox is a no no! That has less relevance on a C class cat. But, really, it would explode the costs. There are perhaps, I am guessing 3, autoclaves world wide that could do a VO70, if that. Steve do you know? A ton of energy to heat those big ones. Carbon moulds for everything, ones capable of 5 atm. Nobody would take part in the race if that were the tech.


Couldn't agree more ! Therefore, a little caution on material properties would be in order, IMHO...

#99 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

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

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:44 PM

...

I have good reasons to believe that in the previous edition, the VO70's that had foam in their slamming area used Corecell P in 100kg/m3 only !!! Not sure what they use this time...
And there are some of the current VO70's that don't have foam in the slamming zone. Kevlar honeycomb throughout ! Very brittle...
The guys use the rule's minimum panel wieght to increase the stiffness of the boat, not the strength of the panels.


100 kg only. Yep could be. I have heard but have no proof that all of the ABstructures engineered boats (all Juan K designs) have Kevlar honeycomb throughout. Note that if I am right about the Tele repair, none of the three boats have had core shear in the bow. Don't know at all for Camper. Pretty confident the other two Farr boats are foam in the bow.

#100 RedFlag

RedFlag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:53 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...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users