Too deep for me ..... Time to fix my night cap (Grin)
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Decoration... or to provide some small amount of drainage from the topside of the platform and prevent puddling/slipping.
They are not there to relieve any "water pressure" from the bottom. Well... if they are they aren't going to relieve any water pressure. The open area of those inserts is insignificant to channel a wave or something to relieve the hydraulic pressure. I've also heard people say they are there to "let the air out" which I'm not even sure why that is important...
Additionally, those inserts are held in with small stainless wood screws from the underside and if you get a wave or water hitting the bottom of the platform, you can knock them out and lose them. I've had to replace a few. They should also be inspected from time to time for loose fitting and be repaired as needed.
I said I might be wrong...
Anyone can shoot holes in this analysis..
While I am relieved to know that the inserts on the platform are validated, mostly for creature comfort (being ours), I am still really puzzled by something.
On my boat, as well as other 340's (just so you know that I am not solely focused on my craft) there is a notch or cutout in the hull sides about 10 feet from the transom going back or a step by any other name. Marketing gimmic, or does it really serve a purpose?
At the speeds my boat travels, I can't imagine it does anything other than reduce the wetted surface area of my boat towards the stern. I suppose that would reduce drag, but wouldn't it also reduce lift and cause the boat to squat?
These are the things that keep me awake at night.....
(and yes Dennis, this is a major, major attempt at derailing the OP's thread, how am I doing? Although I am interested in the answer to this query.)
A. That's a really ugly paint attempt. Go to livescribe.com and buy and pen.
Gary, just something I thought as I was reading... "2-4 ft/s"... does that estimate include the downward motion of the platform, or is that just the wave speed?
Also, does the weight of the platform need to be considered in finding the "net" force on the transom/mounting hardware? Or, would that be negligible since it's under water?
Another "also" question... The addition of the buoyant force would, obviously, be spread out across the entire platform and mounting hardware (assuming a perfect, uniform force). Would that mean that this extra force, in reality, is not as bad as it looks on paper?
Here's something interesting... it looks like SR may have changed the platform for your boat. Looking strictly at the pictures online, it appears there are now 7 holes in it. Hmmm...
Looks like you're smiling in that dinghy!!!!
After spending a number of years managing a sizable fleet of 12" steel I beam frames on wheels (container chassis), I can report with authority that it takes much less than 1,000 pounds applied repetitively over time to break them. But that's a digression for another day.
Henry
Actually, the closer you can get an airplane to not working, the more maneuverable it is. Modern fighters almost don't fly.Did I mention airplanes are a machine designed to almost not work?
Maybe the engineers at SR figured out just how much "lift" the boat needed to run efficiently and could get away with shaving some inches off, without compromising the beam of the boat.
I'll look into the livescribe, it looks pretty cool. I thought though, that maybe I would get extra credit, because my diagrams are in color...