Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Circular arc hull - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

209: 447:, on this with some clear drawings that illustrate the principle. It also describes the resultant hull as being a segment of a toroid, which is a nice clear image. In this case it's claimed that the toroid hull has stability advantages, presumably (If this is my correct interpretation of the patent, I don't believe the mechanics of it) as such a toroid presents a surface with no 205: 519:
This is an encyclopedia, not a social network. The ARS technique for rescuing articles produces crap ignorant articles that can't even be cleanly deleted. With a crap article squatting on a title, no progress happens in the future. ARS-ing an article is harmful and it's better to delete them instead.
430:
Transverse frames of constant radius. Perhaps counter-intuitive (although once again, who had a really better shape?) but it makes the jig building a lot simpler. You can make all of the frames on a single jig. This is also related to the two segment hull, rather than a single circular arc: By
386:
I think people are confusing two entirely different things here: hulls which are circular in cross section (at least up to the waterline), which are anything but new, and probably go back to the dugout canoe, and the Ljungstrom sailboat hull, which isn't actually circular in cross section, but
317:- keep 'Circular arc hull' as a redirect. The hull design seems only to have been used for sailboats, and the only unique feature of the Ljungstrom sailboat seems to be the hull design. I can see no good reason to have two articles on the same object. 353:
If it existed before the designer, then just have a separate article for it. Is this taught in university level textbooks on shipbuilding or historic ships? Someone from WikiProject Ships should know about this sort of thing. I'll go ask them.
661:
territory - we'd need a source that actually covers 'circular arc' hulls as a topic, and makes clear what its defining characteristics are. This article as it stands at least makes clear what its topic is - the Ljungstrom sailboat hull.
387:
instead consists of a hull having a cross section of two arcs of a constant radius, meeting in the middle at an angle to form a keel - it is a lot easier to understand from a drawing than it is to describe though, take a look here
217: 169: 407:
Transverse frames of circular section. This makes the frames easy to construct. This technique long pre-dates Ljungstrom. Also, unless you know of a theoretically better shape (quite a modern innovation), why
295: 122: 265: 163: 431:
shifting the centre of the arcs, the beam can be narrowed towards stem and stern and the hull section proportions changed, even though the jig radius remains constant.
280: 629:
There are no reliable sources cite that discuss this 'distinct hull design' except in relation to the Ljungstrom sailboat. Why should we cover the same topic twice?
388: 129: 404:
The article fails completely to explain what a circular arc hull is about. As a result, this AfD. There are three aspects to the hulls described here:
547:
since the topic has not "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". The only sources listed are not
643:
A merge is a reasonable outcome as long as the target notes that the design predates the Ljungstrom sailboat (as noted in discussion above).
95: 90: 412:
make it circular? Ljungstrom claimed an advantage here (although I don't know if there's any good reason to support his theory) that radius
99: 440:
defining the profile of the hull, not the elevation view of the frames. These too are not unique to Ljungstrom. There's a later patent,
82: 213: 17: 548: 184: 455:, it's not necessary to be theoretically correct, just as long as your final answer happens to work out right, even by chance. 151: 232: 725: 40: 694: 648: 614: 204:. PROD contested in the grounds that the nomination was done with "zero prior research", which I find a bit odd, as 145: 706: 671: 652: 638: 618: 597: 568: 529: 514: 508: 494: 464: 399: 377: 326: 302: 287: 272: 256: 238: 64: 141: 657:
The problem is that once we start writing about more general 'circular arc' hull designs, we are going into
690: 667: 644: 634: 610: 525: 490: 460: 395: 340: 322: 86: 609:
per above discussion. Distinct hull design that is worthy of inclusion per coverage in reliable sources.
191: 721: 593: 299: 284: 269: 36: 442: 451:
component to impinging waves, thus is rolled less by them. Note that in naval architecture, like the
702: 504: 314: 252: 177: 697:) 05:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC), that there is a distinct hull design that is worthy of inclusion.-- 578: 227: 500: 390:. An article on hulls of circular cross section wouldn't include the Ljungstrom design at all. 157: 663: 630: 521: 486: 456: 448: 391: 336: 318: 78: 70: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
720:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
589: 422: 355: 544: 201: 658: 247:
This AfD should be posted on the Engineering, Sailing, Ships and Watersports projects. --
499:
Andy, !voting "delete" just because of an ARS tag on the AfD could be taken as somewhat
698: 248: 55: 222: 116: 553: 335:
Circular arc hulls long pre-date Ljungstrom, although his design was distinct.
452: 581:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
279:
Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's
714:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
421:
It's not substantially changed whether you use a circle or two
112: 108: 104: 176: 588:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 296:
list of Transportation-related deletion discussions
190: 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 728:). No further edits should be made to this page. 266:list of Technology-related deletion discussions 485:Better deleted outright than "fixed" by ARS. 425:with a ridge on the keel line, as Ljungstrom. 8: 294:Note: This debate has been included in the 264:Note: This debate has been included in the 689:per above discussion, because I agree with 293: 278: 263: 220:is the book search (with patent filings). 281:list of content for rescue consideration 216:is Scholar (minus patent filings), and 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 208:is the general Google search yield, 343:) 14:26, 1ou hav8 August 2013 (UTC) 24: 1: 707:13:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 65:06:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC) 212:is the news archive search, 672:13:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC) 653:13:12, 28 August 2013 (UTC) 639:13:11, 28 August 2013 (UTC) 619:05:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC) 598:11:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC) 569:08:53, 27 August 2013 (UTC) 530:21:30, 26 August 2013 (UTC) 515:20:44, 26 August 2013 (UTC) 495:14:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC) 465:10:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC) 400:00:02, 20 August 2013 (UTC) 378:23:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC) 327:13:25, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 303:15:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC) 288:20:08, 19 August 2013 (UTC) 273:13:01, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 257:11:22, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 239:05:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 745: 717:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 549:WP:Independent sources 416:were a cause of drag. 445:, Henry Marschewski 315:Ljungstrom sailboat 437:from front to back 48:The result was 691:Candleabracadabra 645:Candleabracadabra 611:Candleabracadabra 600: 423:circular segments 305: 290: 275: 79:Circular arc hull 71:Circular arc hull 63: 736: 719: 587: 583: 564: 561: 559: 558: 511: 446: 374: 371: 368: 365: 362: 359: 300:Northamerica1000 285:Northamerica1000 270:Northamerica1000 237: 235: 230: 225: 195: 194: 180: 132: 120: 102: 62: 60: 53: 34: 744: 743: 739: 738: 737: 735: 734: 733: 732: 726:deletion review 715: 576: 562: 556: 555: 554: 513: 509: 441: 372: 369: 366: 363: 360: 357: 233: 228: 223: 221: 137: 128: 93: 77: 74: 56: 54: 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 742: 740: 731: 730: 710: 709: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 675: 674: 622: 621: 603: 602: 601: 585: 584: 573: 572: 571: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 507: 505:The Bushranger 474: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 434:Circular arcs 432: 427: 426: 418: 417: 381: 380: 347: 346: 345: 344: 330: 329: 307: 306: 291: 276: 260: 259: 198: 197: 134: 73: 68: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 741: 729: 727: 723: 718: 712: 711: 708: 704: 700: 696: 692: 688: 685: 684: 673: 669: 665: 660: 656: 655: 654: 650: 646: 642: 641: 640: 636: 632: 628: 627: 626: 625: 624: 623: 620: 616: 612: 608: 605: 604: 599: 595: 591: 586: 582: 580: 575: 574: 570: 566: 565: 550: 546: 542: 539: 538: 531: 527: 523: 518: 517: 516: 512: 510:One ping only 506: 502: 498: 497: 496: 492: 488: 484: 481: 480: 476: 475: 466: 462: 458: 454: 453:Davis airfoil 450: 444: 439: 438: 433: 429: 428: 424: 420: 419: 415: 411: 406: 405: 403: 402: 401: 397: 393: 389: 385: 384: 383: 382: 379: 376: 375: 352: 349: 348: 342: 338: 334: 333: 332: 331: 328: 324: 320: 316: 312: 309: 308: 304: 301: 297: 292: 289: 286: 282: 277: 274: 271: 267: 262: 261: 258: 254: 250: 246: 243: 242: 241: 240: 236: 231: 226: 219: 215: 211: 207: 203: 193: 189: 186: 183: 179: 175: 171: 168: 165: 162: 159: 156: 153: 150: 147: 143: 140: 139:Find sources: 135: 131: 127: 124: 118: 114: 110: 106: 101: 97: 92: 88: 84: 80: 76: 75: 72: 69: 67: 66: 61: 59: 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 716: 713: 686: 664:AndyTheGrump 631:AndyTheGrump 606: 577: 552: 540: 522:Andy Dingley 487:Andy Dingley 482: 478: 477: 457:Andy Dingley 436: 435: 413: 409: 392:AndyTheGrump 356: 350: 337:Andy Dingley 319:AndyTheGrump 310: 244: 199: 187: 181: 173: 166: 160: 154: 148: 138: 125: 57: 50:no consensus 49: 47: 31: 28: 590:Mark Arsten 164:free images 443:US 4638753 58:Sandstein 722:talk page 699:DThomsen8 501:WP:POINTy 249:DThomsen8 37:talk page 724:or in a 579:Relisted 543:- Fails 123:View log 39:or in a 414:changes 245:Comment 170:WP refs 158:scholar 96:protect 91:history 545:WP:GNG 541:Delete 483:delete 449:normal 202:WP:GNG 200:Fails 142:Google 100:delete 659:WP:OR 373:Focus 313:with 311:Merge 185:JSTOR 146:books 130:Stats 117:views 109:watch 105:links 16:< 703:talk 695:talk 687:Keep 668:talk 649:talk 635:talk 615:talk 607:Keep 594:talk 563:coxn 551:. - 526:talk 503:. - 491:talk 479:keep 461:talk 396:talk 351:Keep 341:talk 323:talk 253:talk 218:this 214:this 210:this 206:this 178:FENS 152:news 113:logs 87:talk 83:edit 410:not 234:eef 224:Dea 192:TWL 121:– ( 705:) 670:) 651:) 637:) 617:) 596:) 567:\ 528:) 493:) 463:) 398:) 325:) 298:. 283:. 268:. 255:) 229:db 172:) 115:| 111:| 107:| 103:| 98:| 94:| 89:| 85:| 52:. 701:( 693:( 666:( 647:( 633:( 613:( 592:( 560:u 557:t 524:( 489:( 459:( 394:( 370:m 367:a 364:e 361:r 358:D 339:( 321:( 251:( 196:) 188:· 182:· 174:· 167:· 161:· 155:· 149:· 144:( 136:( 133:) 126:· 119:) 81:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
 Sandstein 
06:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Circular arc hull
Circular arc hull
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
WP:GNG
this
this

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.