3D parametric Yacht Design

3D renderings

Anyone who would need or like 3D renderings, static, dynamic or fly-through can call upon me.
All I need is 2D drawings, it takes about 3-5 days to get the 3D delivered on your screen.

3D in Unigraphics

I used 3D CAD, Unigraphics NX with Studio SHape modul, to model a ship or yacht from 2D sketch. The good thing is, everything is solid so further analyis is possible within this program. Surfacing is okay and also used in the automotive industry.


Jos

2D or 3D

Early in my profesional career as a yacht engineer I could see the benifit of 3D modeling in engineering spaces, mostly for placement of equipment, piping and wiring runs ect.............but found that the programs that where avaliable then were difficult to master. Since then there are many great programs on the market that I have played with and I believe that ultimately to build an entire yacht digitaly is the way to go, however I do agree that most owners/people find it easier to follow if a system or layout is presented in a 2D format. So there will allways be a need for 2D drawings.

Garry

In my opinion, 2D sketch are more impressive than week of computational renderins in 3D! A very good 2D renderings are more personal than machine 3D renderings. I agree with Lars and you, that owner want to see 2D drawings.

3D is good, if it will be used for very large projects that need collaboration between companies and divisions in the company. Building complex engineering environment in large ships can be very difficult, if you do that in 2D.

This is an interesting discussion. As someone who is entirely self taught, and has never been told of a correct or accepted way of doing things before I jumped in at the deep end, logic dictated to me to start modelling in 3D as early in the design process as possible. I agree that 2D drawings are very necessary, but I find it easier to generate accurate 2D drawings from a 3D model than the other way around.

I also find the ability to calculate static and dynamic stability, centre of gravity, centre of bouyancy, wetted surface area, drag coefficients, hydrodynamics and so forth on the fly to a very high accuracy from a 3D model to be incredibly useful in making small or even major changes to a hull design quickly, then observing the changes in data to get it closer and closer to meeting the required design criteria.

These changes from revision to revision can affect almost every aspect of the hull shape, which I would argue would be incredibly time consuming in 2D, then having to make a whole lot manual calculations to determine if it is closer or further from meeting the required specifications, only to model in 3D when it's all done.

This is to say nothing of the added tools available when modelling in 3D to achieve perfectly fair curves and contours.

Perhaps I am not understanding the comparison going on here though. I guess it also comes down to what you are used to.

Rich

sketch or rendering

I do agree a hand drawn sketch is a work of art that can not be compaired to a digital rendering when it comes to the essence of design and it is a skill that sadly seems to be overlooked. However when it comes down to construction details I believe that it is quicker easier and more accurate to draw in 3D. I have found that I can draw a 35m hull and deck all frames, bulkheads and major structural members in less that a day in 3D on paper this would take me at least a week not to mention the basic hydrostatic, resistance and stability calculations that come with many of the packages. So while I often doodle ideas on paper my real designing is done in 3D.

I guess it really does depend on your style of working, your logical thought process through a design and your unique method of taking a design from concept to manufacture. I would never criticise anyone for drawing out thier entire yacht by hand with pencil and paper, it is a skill that will soon probably be lost to the digital age.

I think also we may be talking about 3D modelling to two different standards for two different purposes?

I would imagine a 3D model for conceptualization or even just producing pretty renderings of the exterior does not need to be incredibly accurate, definitely to scale, but not perfect and could be quickly generated from 2D drawings. The type of 3D modelling I am talking about is literally building an exact digital model of the yacht, accurate to a fraction of a millimetre, including framing, all structural elements, literally everything, every nut, bolt, fixture and fitting, similar to the way Boeing modelled and designed it's 777 entirely in 3D, and as a result was able to manufacture to closer tolerances than ever before achieved.

Such a model takes far longer than just a few hours to produce, and is built piece by piece throughout the entire design process. The advantage is that such a model in theory renders tank testing somewhat obsolete as all this data can be generated to incredible accuracy directly from the 3D model. Every single component can be test fitted and adjusted or redesigned without ever cutting or building anything.

I found when building my actual model from the 3D model of my hull, I was quickly able to generate 2D section drawings and framing from the 3D model, and while not quite ready to be used to laser cut components from steel plate, when printed out on A3 paper on a laser printer they were far more accurate than I would have been able to draw by hand. I transfered the print-outs to thick cardstock, and the framing went together perfectly. I certainly can't imagine it would take long to make them ready for CNC work.

There are a lot of undeniable advantages to designing a yacht from the start entirely in 3D, this is just my humble opinion, yes, but if the Americas Cup teams, and many others design thier yachts in this way that says something to me about the validity of the technology and techniques.

I am convinced that it must end up saving time and money, and allows far superior results in the end product. However, I have no actual experience of this.

I am not a commercial or professional naval architect, and I have very little exposure to the industry at large but I always assumed that virtually every yacht was designed this way now. I am actually surprised to learn of design work still done by hand or in 2D. No offense is intended at all to those of you that do things differently, as I said, I think there is a place for both and in a lot of ways I think it is harder and takes more skill to produce quality 2D drawings by hand.... you actually have to think, the computer is not there to do that for you!

Rich

Just one customer's point of view.

I've purchased everything from specialised machine tools to houses over the past few years and full 3D made a significant difference in the ease of making changes and final decisions. 2D is nice and helped but being able to see everything in 3 dimensions with multiple viewing angles brought many things to light that would have been impossible to change or correct later on. All the designers I've met seem to be able to imagine quite accurately the 3 dimensional reality even from paper drawings. I am not so gifted.
If I were to be purchasing a custom vessel and the fact that my engineer is 6 foot 5" tall were not taken in to account during the design of the engine room and other areas that he needed access to.....

2D is art. 3D is real. I have a copy of the overall blueprint for a walking conveyor on my wall. It's beautiful to look at but nothing compared to the final piece. Bottom of this page, painted orange:
http://www.suncor.com/default.aspx?ID=9
After all these years I still marvel at how these pieces of paper became a magnificient machine.

AMG: The large LCD displays are very nice but I've found that using a 42" plasma placed proportionately further away is easier to use. Having a second, smaller display for the tools keeps the main workspace uncluttered. Perhaps it's just the applications that I use but it may be worth trying out for your purposes.

I would agree if you are going to used 3D you have to accurate to the inth degree and for that reason it is near ideal for engineering planning. Personally I start sketching by hand a basic concept then move to drawing the hull using "ProLines" which does all the basic calculations, I then export the 3D model of the hull to Rhino to make final cosmetic changes ( sheer, transom ect..anything that does not effect hydrostatics ) and proceed with drawing stations ( 5 minutes for 50 ) stations spacing is generally worked on frame spacings or a denomination of, Buttocks ( Longitudinal girders, engine bearers ect... ) Waterlines ( topside stringers ) Diagonals ( bottom stringers ) it does not allways work out but within an hour I have all the basics for the hull construction. I then usually make a 2D drawing of these elements which I export to Autocad for final touchup and presentation work for a completed lines drawing including a perspective, Autocad has by far a better 2D output than Rhino but Rhino walks all over Autocad when it comes to 3D it's great that the use compatable file formats. But all up if I have my head in gear I can do this in about 6 hours but when doing this by hand it takes me a full 2 weeks.

I suppose that I really ought not to be in this thread since I can't even draw a straight line with a straight-edge to help.

AMG
My point about the 6'5" engineer was not well put. I just find that when a 3d "walkthrough" can be done and there are other items in the view with which I'm familiar for scale, certain things seem to be obvious that weren't so in the drawings. 2D is great for the conceptual side.

The plasma that I'm using is a Fujitsu 4242. I have no idea what the resolution is. I'll ask the IT guy.

Regardless of drawing skills the most important thing about design is ideas and opinion and being able to put them forward.

A few years ago I was working as Captain / Engineer on a 100 ft motoryacht. The engineroom was so tight that it was nearly impossible to gain access between the engines and hull to do basic maintenance and it would have been physicaly impossible to do major work the only way that this could be done wwould have been to remove the centre engine then lift and slide the wing engine to the centre. why they went with 3 mains I have no idea as is would have been much more logical to go with the next series bigger engine to get the power and there was plenty of length and hight to accommodate this. Had a 3D model been presented to the person the yacht was built for I am sure that they would have made it so.

Yep, I agree AutoCAD is the tool of choice for 2D. I use Rhino and AutoCAD depending on what I need to do. I can usually export just what linework I need of the 3D model to AutoCAD for a 2D drawing pretty quickly.

When I last contacted my steel supplier about laser cutting, he gave me all the specs of the file he would need, and being able to supply him with a dxf file that is basically ready for cutting can save some real money because they have to do very little manipulation of it.

Garry, you are way faster than I am! But that is down to experience I suppose. I am still learning as I go along, and I work full time running my own video and film production company, so it takes me a long time to do anything. I spent months on the hull for my current project just because I only had an hour here and there to put into it. I also started from scratch over and over a number of times, and in the end made 31 revisions to get it right.

I would like to progress now to the framing of the hull and internal structure, but I am stuck with my head in a book trying to learn and understand how to perform stress and load calculations on the hull from mast and rigging, and the keel to determine frame spacing, bulkhead placement, material thickness required and so forth. Perhaps this is more crucial in a sailing yacht where loads are perhaps quite high in certain areas than it is in a motor yacht.

Garry, how do you determine this? I'm trying to get to grips with the theory behind it but when you say you are able to get this far within an hour or so I fear I am missing something simple or overcomplicating things.

Perhaps this is a subject for a new thread, but if anyone could help I would greatly appreciate it.

Rich