Pontoon boat rental gulf shores 36542

Atlanta wooden boat association membership
Hull Design software I have designed a 4.9m cat on graph paper and I want to design it using CAD software. Location: Cudjoe Key Fl Tom, I went through this software thing for a number of years, and finally realized the only good boat design software is a large piece of paper and a sharp pencil! Location: Denmark Personally, I also prefer to do it the old-fashioned way, but I must admit that it is by no means better than using a computer - only slower! Software for small craft engineering is available, but probably not for craft of the size you mentioned.
The price of $150,000 that BillB mentioned is ridiculus, but you must be prepared to spend up to a couple of thousand, though (I should mention here that there are free- and shareware available, too - search for Hullform or PolyCad).
Location: MX Hi Tom, Bill is correct up to some degree, be sure of what you are looking for (or what you want to achive with the software results wise), this softwares are usefull but they are not magic boxes that you ask and they respond, so one quick response could be prosurf and rhino, it has worked for me, and they do most of what i need, this is for hull shape and interior detailing, other good one is hullform and rhino, hullform the pro version is quite complete, it may be little bit harder to use IMO, and again this is for hull fairing and lofting, stability (initial with rhino and prosurf) and complete with hullform, other people will be able to give you their opinions. Location: Perth, Western Australia I have to comment regarding Bill's statements about the high cost and complexity of modern CAD systems. Similarly, Maxsurf was the system of choice of 7 out of 10 of the syndicates involved in the 2003 America's Cup. I do not disagree that designing with pen and paper is a perfectly valid way of creating a hull shape, but it is slow, difficult to calculate volumetric properties, and inherently inaccurate, requiring the additional step of full sized lofting to create accurate lines to build from. Rather than imposing a fixed style on designs, I would argue that computer aided design methods have resulted in a greater degree of artistic freedom in the design of hulls and superstructures, particularly on luxury yachts that have gone from relatively simple shapes 20 years ago to a wide variety of more organic shapes, made possible by powerful surface modelling software. The pic below, a design by Brett Bakewell-White of New Zealand, is a good example, initially modelled in Maxsurf with further detailing and rendering in Vellum 3D. I must mention again, there is a BIG difference between Design software and Engineering software. Back to the reality of designing craft under 100 feet, which are considered small craft by all marine architects, sure one can figure out what size screws to use by eye, or state what thickness the bulkhead skins should be but I have never seen any Boat Styling software come close to doing this.
As far as pencil and paper and clay models, this has worked for a hundred years, and is 100% accurate. On the contrary, Fastship has a relatively small number of integrated tools compared to Maxsurf. On the other hand, the Maxsurf suite consists of many well integrated applications using common files and a common user interface, all developed by my company, Formation Design Systems.
Like Fastship, we rely on programs such as ShipCam for downstream structural design and production, as this is an area that we consider to be outside our area of expertise, however Fastship has no equivalent to our preliminary structural design program, Workshop. I should also correct the impression you give that Maxsurf is for small craft and Fastship is for big ships. Location: Cudjoe Key Fl Andrew, now that is the reply Tom is looking for, among the rest of us! You may want to consider drawing and fairing your hull in a CAD program, not a hull design program. When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. When at rest, a surfers weight is borne entirely by the buoyant force (also depending on how much beer you drank the night before). At low speeds every hull acts as a displacement hull, meaning that the buoyant force is mainly responsible for supporting the surfer.
A fluid flowing (water) past the surface of a body (surfer + surfboard) exerts surface force on it.
In contrast, the buoyant force decreases as the hull lifts out of the water decreasing the displaced volume. This is the reason that surfboards with lots of rocker need more speed and their no rocker cousins scream across the water. The major difference between a planing surfboard hull and a displacement hull is the way in which the surfboard travels through the water. At high speeds a displacement hull’s tail will sink down lower and lower as a result of the “hole” created in the water as the surfboard moves forward. A planing hull, on the other hand, will have a flat or concave bottom contour and plane up on top of the water.
Displacement hulls push through the water as they have no hydrodynamic lift, or the surfboard does not rise out of the water as speed increases. The hull design (shape) does not limit the maximum attainable speed but does affect the power required for it to get on plane (on top of the water). Semi-displacement or semi-planing hulls have features of both planing and displacement hulls. There is not one hull design characteristic that differentiates semi-displacement from semi-planing hull. The greater the hydrodynamic lift and higher the hull design speed the more likely it will be referred to as a semi-planing hull.
I came across this blog post by Steven Mast of Mast Surfboards and it is an excellent discussion of the topic.
Old, soft edged boards are the same, as are any true displacement hulls being produced today. Now I’m sure I’ll get some flak for this, but displacement hulls, by their very nature, are not as fast as planing hulls (editors note: . Another thing I’ll take flak for, and I’m saying it anyway, Greg Liddle did not invent the displacement hull surfboard. All displacement hulls, although arguably not “modified transitional displacement hulls”, whatever that means.
I (even after researching and writing it) have to reread it sometimes to understand it too.
I am totally with you on this, my experience is that a board reacts differently in a turn vs. Putting an edge on a tail does not automatically turn the board into a PH—totally agree. All surfboards (regardless of the intentions, theories, or fantasies of their designers) plane on the wave face. Most simmons hulls I see are single concave, but I spoke to a guy in the water who was riding one with a v hull.
Location: Venezuela boat hull design (pad design) Hello, my name is Cristian,this is my firth time here, and i would like to know somebody hellp me.
I have a powerboa 16? vee fiverglass 22? 140hp looper, and i like to put in it a pad but i don?t know the dimensions (size), and how it comport in the boat, i have very much time driving boat, but never with pad, and i need the pad for more speed and woul like to know about the size of a box of water that the people do for blow off in final of transon and bow. I'm not familiar with the calculations for retrofitting an existing hull with a pad; most boats I see with one have it built in from the start. Location: Venezuela thanks matt, bu i like to know what is small size in inchs. I thought I would offer up a 22ft hull for anyone who wants it (see attached picture, Rhino and ACAD files). I would appreciate if someone with experience of this size and type of design would comment on it. It is not my skill but rather that Rhino (that I used for this hull) is really good at making developable surfaces. Location: LA Developable surfaces Houndie check your version of Rhino, they had a bug un-rolling surfaces until release 3, SR3c.
Location: LA 22 dev hull Jeff, I did a quick loft and un-rolled your bottom plate, see if your version of Rhino reads the attached file. The increase in size when you develop a surface should not be a problem but I am no expert on this. I less suspect the accuracy of the computer expanded plates as much as the nature of hand building hulls without stiff jigs. Location: Scotland S70 Project (Give your ideas) This is what I have so far for my teams strathclyde 70 class hull. Location: Scotland Rig Design Heres a quick collage i made in photoshop. S70 Alex, I can't open your pdf file on the rules since I have webtv so I can't comment on how well your boat may fit those rules.
2) google Lester Gilberts technical site-primarily on IOM's but full of usefull design information for RC model Yachts.
Location: Maine Alex, the first drawing you posted seems to have a lot of things cluttering up airflow in the rig. Personally, i would suggest looking into a sloop rig with a large roach mainsail and moderate roach jib. Location: Scotland Yes ive looked at that thread before but it takes some reading and for some of us lesser educated people it is quite tough going.
Also on the subject of hulls would there be any point in making the hull in the shape of a symetrical airfoil. Boston Previous Member   which is why I posted lines of the Downeast hull form, so folks could get a clear image of the type of hull commonly associated with a lobster boat. If your using a hull form of a traditional lobster boat people just might refer to is as such, specially if the top sides and sheer also resemble the layout. Location: Flattop Islands Once again Boston you have posted a question that could be addressed by writing 3-4 books.


From Massachusetts to Nova Scotia there are hundreds of versions of Downeast Lobster Boat hulls, some good , some bad, some indifferent. Understand that these boats are built to make money, everything else is just gravy, if they don't make money they are put out to pasture.
Originally Posted by Tad Once again Boston you have posted a question that could be addressed by writing 3-4 books.
A stretched version of White Pine will produce a very easily driven hull, if the weight is kept in check. I would imagine that often the boats are loaded down with pots only a few times a year, at least the inshore boats, the pots spending most of the time in the water. I?m in the process of setting myself up for retirement and part of the plan is to upgrade my boat. I would like to be able to go across to Tasmania (120 - 450 nm depending on landfall chosen) or coastal hop up to the Great Barrier Reef and on to Darwin (longest leg I'd do around 450 nm). I do like the looks of White Pine but think it may be a little slow (her max is listed as 15 knots and I'd like to have some in reserve). The production boats available in Australia do not ?tick all my boxes? so I am seriously looking at building here (importing is not very attractive at current exchange rates) and we have 3-4 competent wooden boat builders where I live so this seems like my best option.
If she's kept simple (light) you could expect 14 knots with about 120 HP at the prop and 12 knots with 73 HP. I got some feed back on onother forum that the down east hull is stable to a degree but in heavier seas its stability drops off fast. I like the way the beam narrows toward the stern and I also like the ?raised? floor and kitchen up in the main cabin area.
The head could be a fraction bigger so the ?shower? has a bit more room (I?d use this for hanging wet gear as well). Finally, last night I became aware of some select grade Alaskan Yellow Cedar planks (6? x 1? & 10? x 1?) that are available in near me, so I am thinking that this would be a good timber for planking the boat as I?m told it is light, strong and easy to work.
She has a round bilge clinker planked marine plywood hull with an open wheelhouse and a lower cabin with moderate flare forward and good size cockpit deck, strongly raked stem, transom stern and hinged timber slatted marlin platform. There is a very long way between these educated guesses and the real life finished boat, but the expectations are roughly in the range of possible. The largest single weight in this boat will be the fuel load, so that capacity needs to be considered carefully. Location: Flattop Islands I'm also very jealous of the Yanmar engines available in Australia.
A 60' hull that displaces 53,400 pounds will require 44 Hp at the prop for 9 knots in flat water, no bearing looses, alternator drag, no current, wind, waves, no bottom growth, no appendages, etc. Originally Posted by Tad I'm also very jealous of the Yanmar engines available in Australia.
Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA The hull shape has some merit in some seaways and are very different because of the speeds involved compared to the old catherdal hulls. Other contractors on the project include England-based SP ? which will conduct the structural engineering and supply composite materials for the hull ? and Virginia-based AMSEC LLC. Charles Robinson and William Burns are the principals of M Ship Co., which has seven employees. I thought the 'charter' project the defense dept did with the evaluation of the INCAT cat product was a realistic experiment, and the joint project with the Brits on the tri-hull warship also. While the OLD military is still fixed on nuke submarines , carriers and the like , the actual folks doing planning realize these expensive toys would be useless , in say the Philipeans , or Indonesian areas , where Muslem ideoligy is attempting to take over and rule the world.
Sure there is PORK in DC , just look at the latest spending bill 14 inches thick and 30,000 pages of gobldygook, no one has even read , before voting for it. FAST FRED Well maybe with this reasoning we ought to revive the old 3 point hydroplane ideas as well.
And this M-Hulled vessel isn't going to be able to carry any needed equip to a battle area.
Here's a couple of reasonable ideas for the new generation littoral ships, and maybe scalable down to smaller combatants. Originally Posted by brian eiland getting out of hand, this pork situation, and particularly as related to our defense spending.
Location: VAN, CAN I'd like to say that I know Bill Burns and he has been working very hard over the last few years to get this project off the ground. Sure but none will carry a couple of hundred troups and their gear 500 or 1000 miles at speed. Best example of money well spent is the Mach 10 toy originated by DARPA , run by NASA that will pave the way into civilan space.
With the present shuttle & roman candle drive only a politico with a monky wrench can be put in space , as pay off for damage done (John Glenn).
The concept proved with Hypersoar the MACH 10 test vehicle will allow us peons to go to space or not, (pick a different flight) on many long distance trips. As former military naval engineer, I have many doubts on the capability of this boat for carrying armament and about its behaviour in waves.
Do not hope to get air lubrication as the air is not running along the bottom of the hull (the russians know pretty well the very efficient technic of injecting air at the bottom of the hull, the have have 55 knots patrol boats using that feature).
And worst for the US Navy, the very good engineers of commercials heavy hydrofoils are russian and that would be inacceptable. Yes, it's sugaring for improving the retirement of a former Secretary, an old funding system in the US. The trimaran RV Triton is finishing its very successful trials which gave a lot of data for future boats. Finally sometimes there is no need of complications; the fastest ferry in the world (60 knots) is a simple catamaran and makes the journey twice the day between Buenos Aires and Montevideo.
The boats shown by Yipster are projects by the Russian Naval Technical Company, and one of these projects is named Sokol also.
There is not enough volume with the cooled exhaust gases of the engines to get an air lubrication of the hull, also I do not think that a diesel engine would apreciate a such back pressure.
All you know that an increase of 20% of speed will need far more than an increase of 20% of the power; on some hulls it would be easily more than 50%. The mathematical models, the design and the involved technics are very complex and that explains that the precedent trials (first idea of air lubrication was about 1885 if I remember well) failed. Wigs or Ekranoplans are very interesting but suffer of major drawbacks: it requires a lot of power for taking off and there are stability problems. Location: netherlands i stand corrected, allready wondered how those hulls would be ventilated. I understand it will take a while to design it on CAD but I am deternined to design the catamaran using CAD software. And there is the added benefit that the software can do the calculations for you (hydrostatics, stability etc.) much, much faster than if done by hand.
The only reason why I'm considering purchasing CAD software is because all the most successful companies in the world, whether it is to do with yachts or to do with cars are using Cad software. Maxsurf costs as little as $700, yet was used to design the hull shape of Mirabella, the world's largest single masted yacht.
Each one of these syndicates could afford to choose whatever software they liked, and in many cases they were sponsored by major CAD vendors, yet they chose to pay full retail price for Maxsurf. As a result, few of todays professional designers still do things by hand, and more and more use computer systems such as Maxsurf, and are more than satisfied with the results. Maxsurf and the like, are fine programs for small craft, and making beautiful displays, BUT they don't ENGINEER the boat! Remember you the draftsman are creating the exact cut lines this way, the computer is always off by some.
Proteus, the authors of Fastship, rely on GHS (by Creative Systems) for their hydrostatics and stability, NavCad (by Hydrocomp) for their resistance and propulsion, the US Navy SMP program for their seakeeping analysis, and ShipCam (by Albacore Research) for detailed structural design.
Maxsurf is used by shipyards of all sizes, including installations in 5 of the biggest shipyards in Japan - Mitsui, Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, IHI and Sumitomo.
Admittedly, in Maxsurf you can set the tolerance to which curves are calculated, and the default is 0.2mm.
User ID - guest, password - guest) and you can access our FAQ, manuals, and tutorials for all programs. I still draw the basic shapes by hand and transfer them using points into Ashlar-Vellum Graphite ($995). This design does not ride high on the water like a planing hull, instead plowing through and parting the water.
There are displacement hulls, planing hulls and as usually is the case, some variant of the two.
The very nature of the release provided by that edge, by definition puts that board into planing mode. As soon as they get going, the tail end of the board starts submarining and they can literally walk to the nose and go. As soon as you put an edge at the tail, you release the water and the board begins to plane. They may “feel” faster in a section, but without the release, they are constantly dragging more than a sharp edged board would.


He refined it to an amazing degree, made it work in a short package, championing it when it was completely against the trends of the time, but have you ever seen a Weber Foil? But i still don’t understand the general accepted theory that as soon as you put an edge on the tail it turns into a planing hull. It is simple and rather straight, 16deg deadrise, outboard hull with developable surfaces (plywood or alu). I made an effort to use low degree curves to create the surfaces thereby it is easier to keep them fair. Also, you cannot fair control points on the surface membrane stretched between two curves without making it non-developable. Saying its a cone is a little simplistic, see the graphic where I projected the side shell past the chine and sheer of my deeper vee hull. The deviation should be absorbed by most manufacturing process tolerance, I would guess even if you used a CNC machine.
The bow waterlines could be slimmed by moving the forefoot aft or a more gradual turn up from the keel.
Such assembly precludes the attainment of the tolerance of the NC cut parts during field assembly.
We will probably make a second boat with the same hull but with single rudder and bermuda rig to test again. I wanted to try and get any sails behind the mast away from it so they get less turbulent air. No way they would be so popular among the fishermen if they were not well suited to it; not just the bay, but the open New England waters as well.
I have recently joined the Royal Victorian Motor Yacht Club and this has given me the opportunity to look at a wide variety of boats and narrow down what I would like?.. I have looked at a locally built boat, a Cheviot 32, and it is lovely but just a bit to small for me, plus access to the bow is more difficult than I would like. Do you have any suggestions on how this design could be ?improved? to achieve (or exceed) these sort of targets while still meeting what I am after? The lower cabin has a kitchenette, a separate toilet with wash basin and two bench seats that have been set up to convert to a basic double berth. It seems to me as though all they really have to do is look back at a couple of older 'run-about' designs referred to as tri-hulls or cathedral hulls (Boston Whaler as one example). Haven't followed the results of these two experiments, but I'd guess they have both been rejected for reasons of 'not invented here', so we must embark on some more pork projects that sometimes stand reasoning on its head.
I think its great to see a small company get a break, and I wish them all the success in the world. I wish my best to Mr Burns but I think it's very unlikely to have a technical breakout as claimed in the internet site which is more advertising than technical explanations. It works on fast racers running on flat water, light enough and with a lot of surface but at price of a terrible instability.
About as large as a hercules transport, they get right up off the water surface and are large enough to operate in relatively rough seas. The Russians claim very interesting results: 5 to 10 % of the engines power is taken by the compressor(s) but the gain of speed is about 20%. For the while the russians have a patrol boat able to get 55 knots with the power required to go at 45 knots and the speed gains are consistent over the major part of the speed range. Software that they have actually developed from scratch in-house consists of Fastship and Maestro, their excellent structural analysis package.
The enclosed photo is one of the most recent vessels constructed using Maxsurf and Workshop, one of the largest container ships afloat. If you think you can cut and build more accurately, you can always set the tolerance finer. It contrasts with the drag force, which is the component of the surface force parallel to the flow direction. Think of an ocean liner moving through the deep ocean versus a speed boat racing around a lake. The modern surfboard, most “hulls” included, balance these principles to achieve the desired effect or feel. On the contrary, I think his boards are brilliant and have been a huge design influence for me. A displacement hull works more by pushing the water around it’s hull and through the rails and tail, where as a planing hull works more by channeling the water directly through the hull. Put the spoon face up (like a v-hull), and the curvature of the spoon allows it to wobble effortlessly. Also the surfaces are of degree 1x4 (using 2x5 control points) which is key to make them easily developable.
The expanding plate question is a good one, I have done a lot of large aluminum hulls and do not provide shell plate geometry. Brant rock ( well off the south shore ) has got so many buoys floating around it you could walk across em and its out in the middle of nowhere, definitely not protected water and we fixed plenty of boats that worked there. As for the whingin', with all the ridiculous projects that the government funds every year maybe its ok to have a rip at something in our industry. You can recognise in the drawings a catamaran, a trimaran and two slim hulls (with very interesting bows). I have experience with computers but have only used very basic design software before for other reasons.
So if these companies that have turnovers of ?500 million, then they must be doing something right! Any SHIP BUILDING software costs many thousands of dollars simply because in itself, it is huge. I am not using the software to design a 80ft yacht, I would be using it to design a 4.9m catamaran. When it looks good on screen, I plot it out on D size paper and take a long hard look at it, just as I would by hand. A displacement hull has a theoretical hull speed, above which the water actually sucks the hull deeper into the water (I’m simplifying here). The feeling of a well balance hull is one of the great pleasures of surfing that most people fail to credit. A small amount of edge in the tail of a displacement hull will not convert the entire board, it will still act as a DH. The best way to process a developable plate hull is to fair the sheer, and chine (or chine to keel), loft a surface between the two and leave it alone. When I did this edge extension to yours it twisted which is ok as long as those lay lines don't twist or intersect within the section of the plate you are trying to un-roll. Also would it be better to have the servo attatched directly to the mast in a wing sail design. As for Chuck Robinson, like you guys have'nt pulled a few strings, he just has better ones than us. It's has been tried dozens of times,with and without curtains, with and without blowers and even with hinged doors between the hulls. It's valuable specially under Bush the second, intimately bonded to the oil and armament industry. The russians have built thousands of power foilers since the sixties and know very this technique, which has its advantages (simplicity) and limitations (the major being cavitation; if you want to stay simple speed is limited to about 45 knots). I calculate the areas of the hull sections using the 2D Analysis tool, then I input the areas, waterline halfbreadths and vertical centers of the areas into a spreadsheet to calculate the hydrostatics. Surfing one well takes a different approach, especially if you are stepping off a thruster.
If you were going for a hard back foot turn with little else board in the water than the tail only then you could call that planing, otherwise it would still feel and act like a DH majority of the time. I have seen many designers try to get flair into the bow of a developable hull since they appear to bow out.
Make savings in gold, diamonds and silver, and prepare food and gas reserves, hard times are maybe coming. I just want a hull design software that will let me produce a professional hull shape with no major problems, but I don't want to spend thousands on the most high tech software out there. This works fine for small boats and you have the CAD program to detail the rest of the boat, which is really the bulk of the design anyway. At anything above the theoretical hull speed, the boat begins to submarine, actually being pulled deeper into the water. Its just due to the bow shape being a portion of a cone, which is single curvature and the only surface it will accept to create flat patterns. I would like to hear others opinions about how much luck they have had with building from a computer shell expansion.




Pontoon boats for rent lake allatoona lake
How to replace a transom on an aluminum boat video
Free plywood rowing boat plans homemade
Fishing boat rental miami fl yacht




Comments to «How to design a boat hull in autocad online»

  1. polad_8_km writes:
    This birdhouse was 1" thick flooring undertaking - youtube not anticipate too much. Would.
  2. lil writes:
    Constructing your layout on a 4x8 may possibly family member.