Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-05-2008, 04:27   #76
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordMay View Post
catty:
Where did your Bill Gibbs quote come from?

Bill Gibbs’ “Afterburner” (54 Ft Cat’) finished 7TH in this year’s (61ST) Newport to Ensenada International Yacht Race, behind 1 Catamaran (“Loreal”) & 5 Monohulls (80 Ft “Magnitude”, 75 Ft “Akela”, 64 Ft “Medicine Man”, & 70 Ft “Oex”)

Sorry for delay, from The Multihulls Archives May 2008
__________________

__________________
cat skin hat
catty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 04:34   #77
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joli View Post
Dave, I'll give it one last shot here. A couple reasons multis get sticky in very light conditions is because they have a quick motion and little weight to carry through the chop and lulls. It is tough to keep flow attached when the boat naturally has a quick motion, it is tough to keep boat speed with little momentum.

Steadying out the rig so flow can stay attached and keeping momentum through adding weight can in some instances be beneficial. I gave you an example of such a boat in post 33. Going to smaller sail when it is very light is another example.

Nothing in sailing is a zero sum gain. Every adjustment has an impact, some adjustments create surprising results.

Cheers,



Joli

Joli you are dead right, going from a nice breeze to a drifter , the left over slop will kill a multi quicker than anything, especially if its on the nose . Afterburner certainly doesn't suffer from insufficient sail area or from being overweight.
__________________

__________________
cat skin hat
catty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 06:25   #78
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Winters cruising; summers Chesapeake Bay
Boat: Catana 471
Posts: 1,239
A perfect example. Multihulls in slop is the flip side of the very same issue.

Any boat is adversely affected by slop and lighter boats more so. Slop is just an opposing F in F=ma. Glad to see you understand this and how multis may be more adversely affected than heavy monos. Higher "m" means lower "a" for a given F.

Now apply this understanding to the original issue:

It is a cold hard fact that getting more mass moving takes more force and a boat with added mass cannot possibly be faster than it was before - all other things being equal.

Never, never, never.

Yep, a heavier boat will slow down less (from a lower top speed) than the same boat with lighter mass from any resistance. Then it takes more force to regain a lower top speed once the temporary resistance passes. The lower top speed is due to greater friction from pushing more water out of the way.

Get over it guys. This is reality. This is exactly the issue multihull critics like to keep repeating: load up that multihull with too much crap and the performance goes in the tank.

Guess what? The very same principle applies to monos.

Dave
__________________
2Hulls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 06:34   #79
CF Adviser
Moderator Emeritus
 
Hud3's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Virginia
Boat: Island Packet 380, now sold
Posts: 8,929
Images: 49
Dave,

F = ma doesn't account for the "quick motion" experienced by multis in chop, with light air. The motion shakes the wind right out of the sails and they stop dead.
What the heck was the subject of this thread, anyhow? I've lost track!
__________________
Hud
Hud3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 07:05   #80
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Winters cruising; summers Chesapeake Bay
Boat: Catana 471
Posts: 1,239
I understand that "quick motion" is a different, adverse result of chop - and multis don't have a corner on this market. Any lighter boat will get bounced around more than an otherwise equivalent heavier boat.

I submit that even when considering the adverse effects of chop, lighter versions of the same boat will do better overall. All of my discussion has been about effects of adding mass to the same boat - not about comparing different boats. Tossing in an argument about multis behaving badly in chop is a red herring to the "adding mass to perform better" assertion.

"OK crew, looks like it'll be a really light air day. We better flood the bilges and get some more crew to make sure our speed through those dead spots is as best as it can be!!!"

See?

Dave
__________________
2Hulls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 09:06   #81
Moderator Emeritus
 
David M's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Francisco Bay
Boat: research vessel
Posts: 10,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Hulls View Post
I understand that "quick motion" is a different, adverse result of chop - and multis don't have a corner on this market. Any lighter boat will get bounced around more than an otherwise equivalent heavier boat.

I submit that even when considering the adverse effects of chop, lighter versions of the same boat will do better overall. All of my discussion has been about effects of adding mass to the same boat - not about comparing different boats. Tossing in an argument about multis behaving badly in chop is a red herring to the "adding mass to perform better" assertion.

"OK crew, looks like it'll be a really light air day. We better flood the bilges and get some more crew to make sure our speed through those dead spots is as best as it can be!!!"

See?

Dave
.......Yes!
__________________
David

Life begins where land ends.
David M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 09:15   #82
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 24
Images: 1
K Factor

Big Hulls - please say more about the K factor? Is this from Edmond Bruce's model studies of various L/B hulls?

Cal
__________________
Calculator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 09:40   #83
Marine Service Provider
 
fastcat435's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Amstelveen Netherlands
Boat: FastCat 445 Green Motion
Posts: 1,649
Images: 10
Send a message via Skype™ to fastcat435
Here you can find the formula,s for the texel rating and the spread sheet to calculate your own cat, it is still the best formula around for Catamarans.
Catamaran en Trimaran Club Nederland
The FastCat 455 has a texel rating of 98.64 for example and the
Catana 431 a rating of 127.71
the weight difference is 5500 kilo according to this spread sheet

Greetings

Gideon
__________________
fastcat435 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 15:37   #84
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 340
Wetted surface

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
David is quite right, and Gideon is wrong if he means to imply that monos are slower than multis in light airs. A light multi has more wetted surface than a monohull, and it has even more when you add more weight to it. What David left out in his explanation for why multihulls are faster when the wind picks up is the "K" factor, which reflects the lower resistance of a much narrower hull. Cal is right about the effect of waterline length, but he is also leaving out the fact that the "K" factor gets higher if you stretch a hull to make it longer.

It is easier to design a narrow hull in a big boat, than in a small one, because the human body isn't scaling up as the boat gets bigger, and interiors are designed around the dimensions of the human body-if you are to have reasonable accommodations.

BigCat what sought of wetted surface are we seeing on say the 80' mono Magnitude and the 50' cat Afterburner. Well, wetted surface : SA ratio anyway.

Regards

Regards
__________________
cat skin hat
catty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 15:52   #85
cruiser
 
BigCat's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Everett, Washington
Posts: 765
Hi, CSH - I don't have any specifics, but it is considered a truism - just google "catamaran monohull wetted surface"
__________________
BigCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 17:17   #86
cruiser
 
BigCat's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Everett, Washington
Posts: 765
Wetted surface, mono vs. multi

Hi, Catty

For example, on my website, you will find two boats, which have about the same waterline and displacement. One is a catamaran, and one is a monohull. The hulls of the multihull have about 30% more wetted surface than the monohull.
__________________
BigCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 18:16   #87
Senior Cruiser
 
Therapy's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: W Florida
Boat: The Jon boat still, plus a 2007 SeaCat.
Posts: 6,894
Images: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
Hi, Catty

For example, on my website, you will find two boats, which have about the same waterline and displacement. One is a catamaran, and one is a monohull. The hulls of the multihull have about 30% more wetted surface than the monohull.
I don't get it.
Do they weigh the same?
If so then the amount of displaced water is the same.
I guess it is the shape. I know a box is the lowest for the weight.
Strange...
__________________
Therapy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 18:26   #88
cruiser
 
BigCat's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Everett, Washington
Posts: 765
Shape for lowest wetted surface-

"I guess it is the shape. I know a box is the lowest for the weight." No, a circle is lowest for the weight. In three dimensions, a sphere.

If you google "surface to volume ratio," you will see why monohulls have less wetted surface than catamarans.
__________________
BigCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 19:27   #89
Senior Cruiser
 
Therapy's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: W Florida
Boat: The Jon boat still, plus a 2007 SeaCat.
Posts: 6,894
Images: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
"I guess it is the shape. I know a box is the lowest for the weight." No, a circle is lowest for the weight. In three dimensions, a sphere.

If you google "surface to volume ratio," you will see why monohulls have less wetted surface than catamarans.
I can't find what I saw the other day.

It was a link from here somewhere that showed several hull shapes.

I found this.

"2. Surface Area to Volume Ratio

A cube has the highest volume with the least surface area"

Much of this I don't understand well.
__________________
Therapy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2008, 20:06   #90
Registered User
 
waikikin's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Boat: Egan 12.40 in build, Carter 33, Seawind 24
Posts: 162
Windage is another issue esp on bridgedeck cabin cats, you can easily represent the difference on paper by drawing a long thin rectangle(mono) against a much "fatter" one (cat) at various angles esp to windward where it really hurts. All the best from Jeff
__________________

__________________
waikikin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
displacement

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
Capsize Ratio Scott k General Sailing Forum 30 14-03-2013 07:05
Displacement vs Trailing Weight navynarc Monohull Sailboats 6 12-10-2007 04:37
Figuring displacement JusDreaming Multihull Sailboats 10 01-07-2007 09:08
Displacement boats and Hydrofoils Pura Vida Construction, Maintenance & Refit 7 10-03-2007 17:40
Capsize ratio lancercr Monohull Sailboats 37 08-02-2007 07:42



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 17:13.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.