Member Map Go to the Home Page Portal Cruisers & Sailing Forum Cruisers & Sailing Photo Gallery Manage Your Profile! Member Directory Search past discussions! Frequently Asked Questions Community Policies & Posting Rules Register Today, Its FREE!

Go Back   Cruisers & Sailing Forums > The Fleet > General Sailing Forum





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 15-10-2005, 19:44   #1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lancaster, Pa., USA
Boat: none
Posts: 23
capsize ratio

CAPSIZE RATIO = BEAM / (DISPLACEMENT / 64) 0.333

Is this formula overly simplified? Wouldn't keel design have a significant influence? IE. full keel vs.fin, amount of ballast, lead vs.iron, placement of ballast and etc.? Furthermore, what effects would heavily provisioning for an extended cruise have on this formula?

Scott

Scott k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2005, 22:18   #2
Kai Nui
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I am guessing you got some info from the link that GORD posted the other day. I checked the numbers on a couple of boats I am familiar with, and found them to be highly suspect. The site does note that the numbers are generic, and cites the sources. Yes the capsize ratio would be affected by the factors you mention. Although the numbers on the site are based on the designed weight and hull, adding 2000 pounds of equipment and provisions will certainly change the numbers.
It is a good starting reference.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2005, 22:54   #3
Registered User
 
CaptainK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Phoenix, Arizona... USA
Posts: 2,387
Images: 7
Scott k,

I totally agree with kai. When you add weight or subtract weight. The capsize ratios change.

Hope you find what you're looking for.

Regards,

Kevin
CaptainK
CaptainK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2005, 05:51   #4
Registered User
 
Catamount's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Keene, NH
Boat: Island Yachts Peterson 34 GREYHAWK
Posts: 284
This capsize ratio was only intended to be a preliminary screening tool (see "Desirable and Undesirable Characteristics of the Offshore Yachts" edited by John Rousmaniere, published in 1987by Norton). Values less than 2, probably OK for "offshore" sailing, values of 2 or greater -- a more detailed stability analysis would be warranted.

Obviously there is a lot more to determining stability and resistance to capsize than just beam and displacement, such as the distribution of that displacement (vertical center of gravity), etc...

Regards,

Tim
__________________
Tim Allen
My Boat Projects and Sailing Stories
Sailors for the Sea, a new voice for ocean conservation
Catamount is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2005, 08:30   #5
Senior Cruiser
 
Jeff H's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Annapolis, Maryland
Boat: Farr 11.6 (AKA Farr 38) Synergy
Posts: 542
Images: 13
I know that I have explained this on this forum before but here it is again, both of these formulas were developed at a time when boats were a lot more similar to each other than they are today. These formulas have limited utility in comparing boats that otherwise are very similar.

Neither formula contains almost any of the real factors that control motion comfort or seaworthiness. Neither formula contains such factors as the vertical center of gravity or bouyancy, neither contains weight or buoyancy distribution, and neither contains any data on dampening all of which really are the major factors that control motion comfort or likelihood of capsize. Weight alone has no bearing on motion comfort and stability.

I typically give this example to explain just how useless and dangerously misleading these formulas can be. If we had two boats that were virtually identical except that one had a 500 pound weight at the top of the mast. (Yes, I know that no one would install a 500 lb weight at the top of the mast but teak decks, heavy decks, wooden or steel spars can easily have that kind of impact.) The boat with the weight up its mast would appear to be less prone to capsize under the capsize screen formula, and would appear to be more comfortable under the Motion Comfort ratio. Nothing would be further than the truth. That is why I see these formulas as being worse than useless.

Jeff
Jeff H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2005, 11:32   #6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lancaster, Pa., USA
Boat: none
Posts: 23
I was just curios about the formula since it seemed just too simple and does not take into account any factors other than disp. and beam.

.........so the bottom line is that I would be better off to forget these ratios and focus
on those boats that have PROVEN themselfs for the type of sailing I'll be doing.

Thanks guys
Scott
Scott k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2005, 11:42   #7
Kai Nui
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Yes and no. This is a good starting point. You can eliminate boats with over a 2.0 or even in the upper range, using this formula. After that, you have a much narrower field to select from.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2005, 12:29   #8
Senior Cruiser
 
Alan Wheeler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Marlborough Sounds. New Zealand
Boat: Hartley Tahitian 45ft. Leisure Lady
Posts: 8,042
Images: 102
I think it's important to throw in here, that capsize stability is different to roll/motion stability. Don't consider capsize stability as a measurment to what a boats movement will be.
__________________
Wheels

For God so loved the world..........He didn't send a committee.
Alan Wheeler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2005, 18:29   #9
Registered User
 
BC Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kelowna BC
Boat: Tanzer 8.5m Tanzer 22
Posts: 1,029
Images: 5
Capsize

Two boats I am familiar with are my own Tanzer 8.5 and a C&C 29. I am sure the capsize screening test could not tell you which of these boats can carry sail better and which one will capsize first. Assume that both boats wiegh the same and the keels weigh the same. The C&C has the majority of the wieght higher in the keel, while my boat carries the weight low. The C&C has a taller rig with more weight up high. Consequently it is a faster boat in light to moderate breezes, and we sail over the top of them when it blows, and we stand up better. He has the better boat for Wednesday night races, I have the better boat for adverse conditions. We need to do research on the boat in mind, for the conditions we want.
Michael
BC Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cal 39 Stede Monohull Sailboats 31 12-02-2010 18:43
Selecting the ideal live aboard monohull sailboat Stede Liveaboard's Forum 47 19-11-2008 21:18
righting a multi gone turtle sail_the_stars Multihull Sailboats 110 15-06-2008 04:31
is there a huge difference in price between... fujiwara takumi General Sailing Forum 10 26-08-2004 03:18
Boat choices. maui Monohull Sailboats 33 25-05-2004 13:12


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 13:43.


Other Social Knowledge forum communities:
Cooking Forum - Sailing Forum - Early Retirement - Airstream Trailer - Aquarium Forum - Royal Forum - Book Forum - Volkswagen Touareg Forum - Jeep Wrangler Forum - Whitewater Kayaking & Rafting Forum - Fiberglass RV Forum - RV Forum - Truck Conversion - U2 Music Forum
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© copyright 2002-2009 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.