BAOW Performance Number

MultiHulls General Discussions (MultiHull/MultiOne)
1

As noted in a different post/topic here on this forum, Doug Lord seems to insist we all need to become more involved in numerical data in order to determine the best multihull to purchase, for a given, expected, performance.

The BAOW Performance Number (rating from 0 to 10) can provide a quick, effective and easy to understand guide number for determining which boat should be selected for your immediate, pending multihull purchase.

With a significant amount of data to back up my research, I find the following, current, BAOW Performance Numbers:

My F-48 (Water Resist design) is a 4
My MultiONE is a 7.
Peter’s (Birch) Mini40 multihull, is a 10.
Jack Ronda in Washington has a MultiONE that is also rated as a 10
Based on available information Matthew Lingly’s rates a 9 - possibly a 10
A significant number of French multihulls rate a 10
Bill Hojnacki has a NIGHTMARE that rates a 10

Unfortunately, I don’t have data on <u>ANY</u> Microsail F-48 or MultiONE products, but I am guessing they would rate from a 2 or 3 to a 7 (maybe an 8.5) but until I know that data it is strictly speculative at this time. Once I can obtain confirmation of data, I can update the ratings.

These BAOW Performance Numbers give a good indication of what can be expected - and in any wind strengths for a variety of designs. Unfortunately, it doesn’t take into account sail area, since that can be varied at the skipper’s choice, but that doesn’t play an important role in the rating of these various designs.

Those looking for that magic formula when purchasing a multihull might want to give this rating system a consideration. A <font color=“red”>“0” </font id=“red”>rating is a boat I would never recommend for consideration. A <font color=“orange”>“5” </font id=“orange”>is a design to perhaps watch and consider. Any boat noted above rated at <font color=“green”>9 or 10 </font id=“green”>is a suggested as a “best buy” for optimal, immediate performance on the water.

2

Can you describe in detail how you calculate this number?

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

3

Dick

Thanks mate. This calculation was given to you in confidence with the understanding that it should never be published. It took a hell of a long time, and numerous long distance phone calls to work out if the system does work, not only here but in other places around the world.

You were included in the original information gathering process, but I now wonder if you should have been at all.

Your post doesn’t show the actual facts. The system, as we have recently discovered, will actually show boats can rate higher than ten.

Thanks again for posting something that was meant to be kept among the “select” few.

Peter

4

Peter, my apologies for the post. It was my understanding that the rating process was confidential, but the actual rating numbers would be OK to use.

Doug, the process of using the formula is pretty straight forward and when explained to me makes a lot of sense. Based on a scientific principle, it is an accepted method that could be used pretty much worldwide. I think I heard that the process had been developed some time ago and had been recently used by some of the Volvo 60 syndicates, but I could be wrong. If I am wrong I must apologize and will go ba

5

Hmmmm - something happened to my post.

If I am wrong I must apologiz

6

Not sur e wha

7

Now, let me get this straight : this is a secret formula veritably steeped in scientific research,right?
You say it is a “performance” number ,right?
Well, how in the world can you have a “performance” number that doesn’t consider the “engine”? You specifically say that sail area is not considered. That means you cannot measure available power!
So how can any “performance” number be valid that doesn’t in some way measure power?
How about power to carry sail? How about susceptability to pitchpole/capsize?
If a number or combination of numbers could be achieved that present this data you would have something…

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

8

Dick
I think you might be having a problem with your internet. your posts are a little choppy. Might want to run a virus check, to see if your IE is infected with some kind of trojan horse or data minning bug.

-Dan

9

Te t T st

C ap!

10

I have e-mailed Dick about his posts and his BAOW calculations and received back a garbled e-mail from him. I belive he may have some form of computer virus on his computer.

-Dan

11

this BAOW number sounds very intersting and more accurate, after some researches over the net, I am now sure this number is far more “a real world” number…
I also think, that the BAOW number is more a binary number, at least for the first entry (maybe I am wrong here…again I am no pro) so 0 or 1…

I need to make more researches

Wis

if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it!

http://wismerhell.esmartdesign.com/index.htm

12

Wis, thats a great contribution! More accurate ,huh?! Maybe, since you seem to have a grasp of this secret formula, you can explain how it could be a performance predictor without including sail area?!! LOL

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

13

ok
i am lost here
i know i am new to designing with computers. i am old fashion. i know of reynolds numbers. fourd numbers. and some others i cant rember. but i am sure i dont know BAOW. can somebody tell me what they meen? are they weight vs displacement? are thee a ratio of legnth over beam? wetted surface?
or is it a multihull number?
cougar
long live the cup

14

Perhaps I can get in from home…

Doug - I said sail area wasn’t a major factor because as (i hope) you already know based on your Bruce Numbers - everytime I change a rig, or reef the sail in your case - the Bruce Number changes. So if I have a full rig F-48 at 1400 sq. inches, or if I have a MultiONE with the “sport rig” of 800 square inches - this process DOES NOT act as a VELOCITY PREDICTION formula - nor was it ever posted that way.

A platform 48 inches by 48 inches (F-48/Mini40) or a platform 1 Meter x 1 Meter react differently from each other. If I were to put the F-48 max sail on the MultiONE platform, and put teh MultiONE “sport sail” on the F-48 there would be a significant change in velocity. Your BN formula was designed to take that into account and make comparisons - for whatever they are worth. But the two platforms above will have different static stability numbers and these too will change depending on weight, displacement, moving ballast, foils, etc. The BAOW prediction tries to stay away from these ever changing options. Kind of like your “smoke and mirrors” - it’s a differnt target each day, each hour and each minute depending on the wind strength or sail area.

There are two types of information - that which is implicit (and doesn’t need to have a qualifier) The BAOW does this - kind of like saying the distance is 1.2 meters or 48 inches. No qualifiers - we take the info as provided.

The other type of information is what you seem to enjoy posting. It always changes. We can never pin it down to an exact useful meaningful number. It is dependant (as you yourself have posted) on a variety of factors, some but not limited to, sail area, wind strength, righting moment, weight, waterline length, and a host of others. Each time I tired to make a comparison (like my 18 Square to your X3) you quickly (conveniently) changed the topic to include even more qualifiers. For Matthew - I would consider his race challenge, however his desired course is only five (5) of my boat lengths. If he cut it futher back to 5 meters, I would win just standing still, as my boat is 5.5 meters in length. This is what I call a “qualifier” post. Something A can’t happen unless B has already taken place except it requires action Z to be taking place at the same time. By the time you get done adding in all the qualifiers, you find there is no possible comparison to be made. Read your own initial post on the BN topic. You didn’t qualify anything. You simply posted that this formula would be important. Yet, when asked with specific examples, the concept and uesfulness and importance suddenly changes. I note later, that even waterline length needs to be considered. Hate to tell you, but nothing in the intial post indicates anything to do with waterline. Specifically you enter sail area and you enter weight !

Sorry, I must head back to work, and again apologize to Peter for posting something that was supposed to be for working use only and confidential. Maybe Wis can find the French background on the subjet of BAOW concept. All I can really say, if if a boat is rated at a zero (0) don’t consider buying it. If it rates around a 5 you may want to wait and see if you have the time. And if you want to go sailing today - grab on to any boat that is rated “10” ! You can’t go wrong.

Need to see if work PC is still messed up.

15

<font color=“red”>Edited by Moderator dansherman Because of Unacceptable criticism </font id=“red”>

16

doug
the baow number maybe draft ratios? or maybe drag? i dont know either. but that would take into consideration why sail area is not taken into affect?
i have looked into baow number at the univeristy and they seem to think i had 3 heads. so i showed them this thread , and they seem to think it had to do with the drag coeffienct
i dont have a clue. but it has to do with multi hulls
cougar
long live the cup

17

You sure this is really a BAOW rating rather than a BS rating, because its making no sense…

Luff 'em & leave 'em.

18

[:-spin]Maybe I am wrong here, but this is one of the funnier things I have read in quite a while. All of you have taken this one soooooooooooooo hook line and sinker. Im going to take a stab. . . . Lets see.

B.A.O.W. Built And On Water?
How am I doing. . . anywhere close. I have some other ones if I am wrong, but they are some what more offensive!

You are all soo caught up in the numbers that it is funny, and that is the whole point. Get out and go sail! Or heck, sit inside and build a boat and throw it on the water. Racing is secondary in my opinion, but is the proving ground . . . I just like to build and designing.

You can come up with statistics and numbers to prove just about whatever point best serves your purpose. I can develop a rating of some kind that might lead one to believe that my boats are superior . . . But what would be the point.

Anyway, Dick, am I close at all?

~tb

19

if this is a joke it is a poor one
we all use this forum to get usefull information. and people have wasted half a day for me to look for this information. it has to be invlovled with multi hulls.
troy
dick is an honourable man and has never lead me astray. he has given me truthfull information and has help new sailors. this is what this forum is all about.
maybe we have just wrecked a forum . if this si a joke? how do we know what is good information and what is bad
i trust dick you should too
cougar
long live the cup

20

<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by ~tb

B.A.O.W. Built And On Water?
How am I doing. . . anywhere close. I have some other ones if I am wrong, but they are some what more offensive!

<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>

Damn you tb! Ive been trying to suss out what it stood for! (I got some dodgy ones too!)

Seriously though guys, thease jokes do damage, all they do is confuse or p*** people off. I think Doug (with the othe numbers) was looking for a way for us to compare our boats short of all meeting up and going racing, one day we may get a chance but this is the closest we can get for the moment.

Luff 'em & leave 'em.