En página 5 del hilo
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/sta...s-13569-5.html
pone
Vessel Name: “RED MODEL” (LIGHT)
INPUTS
Overall Hull Length 11,98 m
Length Waterline 10,57 m
Flooded Buoyancy (Y/N) N
Beam Waterline 3,27 m
Beam 4,1 m
Displacement MSC 5165 kg
Displacement Max 6190 kg
Height of CE above DWL 6,87 m
Height of CLR below DWL 0,95 m
Angle of vanishing stability 123 deg
Downflooding angle 137 deg
GZ at downflooding angle -0,23 m
GZ at 90 degrees 0,58 m
Sail Area 71,1 sq.m
Area to flooding (Agz) 74,46 m.deg
Area to AVS 75,56 m.deg
RESULTS
Base Length Factor (LBS) 11,040
FL 1,001
Displacement Length Factor (FDL) 0,914
FB 2,519
Beam Displacement Factor (FBD) 0,815
FR 3,066
Knockdown Recovery Factor (FKR) 1,146
Inversion Recovery Factor (FIR) 1,010
Dynamic Stability Factor (FDS) 1,381
Vaw Not aplicable
Wind Moment Factor (FWM) 1,000
Downflooding Factor (FDF) 1,250
Delta 0
STIX 38,838
DESIGN CATEGORY A
Wave height max 7 metres
Windspeed max. Force 10
Now increasing LOA from 11,98 m to 13,0 m (just increasing overhangs to an oldies style one), we realize STIX (you may check it with the spreadsheet I've posted before), instead of increasing, DECREASES from 38,838 down to 38,771
Not a big deal, you may think, but in the limits this can make a long overhangs boat not categorizable under Cat A, while an squared ends one could pass (with all it's marketing consequences).
But it will have not only marketing consequences, but also safety ones, because surviving in rough weather conditions, in situations where a boat is heeled 90º or more, the boat with longer overhangs probably is able to defend itself better than a squared one. Rolf Eliasson states that for those conditions probably is LOA what should be doubled in the formula and not LWL.
Es decir cogen los datos de un supuesto barco que entraría en clase
A, y por el hecho de hacer la proa y popa lanzada (alargando el LOA)
penaliza en el cálculo de STIX y pasaría a categoría B
cuando el barco más alargado probablamente se defendaría mejor en mal tiempo!!!
