PhD or MSc study - stainless steel rigging failure

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
A

Anonymous

Guest
I suggest that the failure in service of stainless steel yacht rigging would make an excellent MSc or PhD study. If anyone has connections with a suitable University they might like to propose it to the Mechanical Engineering faculty.
 
Both BSc and MSc have projects. I think that a BSc Eng student might struggle but a mature MSc, particularly with relevant work experience, would be ideal. The problem is that failure is multi-factorial. Could be a very interesting and demanding project and high kudos for the university if carried out well. I'm not sure that it's ideal PhD stuff as there no original research element that I can think of other than, maybe, a means to predict failure.
 
Some MScs are research based. I know some times people who start off doing a PhD but don't finish it can get a MSc based on what they have done so far.
 
My MSc was entirely research based - and intended that way. Somewhere like Cranfield is probably the ideal centre for work like this. Good idea I think.
 
I've always thought of Cranfield as mainly aerospace but I see from their website that they are much broader, sounds good. Southampton is another possible. I have no contacts at all in academia that would help with this....does anyone have a contact maybe at senior lecturer level, or above? Or a student who might be interested in the project?
 
Depending on the university, that's usually an MPhil (a research degree just short of a PhD). The requirement for originality is not so rigid as for a PhD and the expectation is that an MPhil takes 2 years and a PhD 3 (although many/most take longer). There are MSc's by research and MRes degrees, involving some taught elements but more research, but almost all masters programmes involve a decent project. I would agree that this is a good project for a masters (MSc, MRes) but probably a bit too routine for a PhD project. Cranfield or one of the universities specialising in marine engineering subjects (Southampton Solent, Portsmouth and probably a lot of others) might be interested.
 
I think there's some misunderstanding of how universities work, here. It's certainly true that studies of such aspects of yacht rigging would make interesting projects but what is needed is a student with an interest, in a department where there's someone to supervise the project with relevant expertise. I occasionally have people in my own professional field suggesting 'interesting student research projects' and it's quite rare to be able to match those to specific students.

I'm a sociologist in a university school of education rather than an engineer but I think such a study would present quite a few difficulties. Remember that an MSc student normally has a few months to undertake their project; in that time they are going to have to identify and examine sufficient cases of rig failure to identify patterns and develop theoretical models to explain those patterns. Quite a tall order I think.

Now if Selden or someone like that were to offer to fund such work... But then they make lots of money from broken masts so they might not be keen!
 
Not sure that such a project would be worth anything much Lemain. There is considerable research data on stainless steel fatigue and corrosion failure both at the met dept of sheffield uni and with what were the Brisish Steel stainless facilities at Stocksbridge and Shepcote Lane. Steel making is very much a research led industry but there is a cost / price implication to the best materials.

The trouble with trying anything on boats is that the fatigue exposure varies with the type of use, the weather etc so its difficult to see what useful conclusions could result. We already know that articulation of the ends of the standing rigging is a key issue as is rig size..

And then of course there is the insurance issue. They also do research but theirs is all about failure rates on a statistical and historic basis - they dont pluck the 10 year rule from thin air though this does seem to be used less and less these days.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Now if Selden or someone like that were to offer to fund such work... But then they make lots of money from broken masts so they might not be keen!

[/ QUOTE ]Insurers stand to gain (or lose less). Do insurers ever fund science/technology that is in their own interests? How could one propose projects to them? To whom?
 
It happens all the time in the car industry, the insurers even have reserach facilities at THATCHAM for precisely that purpose - research that is likely to benefit them in terms of reduced claims.

Unfortunately, as has been said, boat use varies dramatically and there isn't the same statistically huge sample size that you get with cars. I have a stumpy masthead rig on a cruiser that does very few sea miles (VERY few at present!) and the rigging is a size bigger than it really needs to be. On the other hand you get racing boats with bendy rigs that get the living daylights pasted out of them every weekend. I'd hate for this research to conclude that we all need to replace our rigging every (say) 7 years - and it's not like the rigging industry would have much incentive to disagree!
 
Surely the study would examine the reasons for failure in service of a representative sample of rigging components of an agreed type, and an agreed service. Maybe it would not include racing (I don't know) where failure would perhaps be more likely to be operation outside safe working limit.

Most cruising yachts (which is what interests me) seldom subject their rigging to SWL let alone full working load though it can happen in a sudden squall. Brittle fracture, corrosion, faulty manufacture of swaged terminals, are among the possible failure modes. Electrical resistance, visual inspection and timed replacement are among the techniques used to reduce the risk. Any study should try to consider the data and make some useful recommendations on risk reduction on scientific grounds, not commercial grounds (which seems to be your fear). Surely using a university rather than the component manufacturer should keep the study on scientific lines.
 
As an ex-Cranfield Senior Research Fellow, I can't see them being interested at the moment. Money, politics etc. I did have one of my thermal management sudents do a research project on yacht refrigeration systems, but trying to tie in projects with courses was always a problem. I don't know if any of the structural people in Mech Eng are interested in sailing, but that would be the only way such a project would get off the ground.
 
Good stuff! Such a study is likely to involve considerable laboratory/hypotheses testing and research beyond 'in service' failure analysis. The topic could equally have transference to Material Science and Civil Engineering as well as Mech Eng. Widening the base without diluting the marine focus might well make it more attractive for research and research grants.
 
That's an idea. Does anyone have a contact there, known to them, with whom they could follow this up?
 
I am not convinced that there is anything original left to discover here. The structural, chemical (corrosion), thermal etc.etc. properties of stainless steel and its failure modes have been researched to death by a whole range of researchers from different perspectives. Could be scope for a book on the subject focusing on rigging applications, but nothing original worthy of PhD research IMHO.
 
Universities don't only work on pure science. What we are talking about is applied science, or engineering. There is no reliable means to determine the safety of ss rigging at the moment, however new, and there could be - and should be.
 
I concur that the material properties are known and established. What's needed is a code of practice, and Lemain is right, it's in the insurers' and riggers' interests to have one set up. Rather like the gas certificate for boats.

If, by researching the history of failed mast and rigging systems, such a code of practice could be formulated, and designers and riggers persuaded to sign up to it, we SHOULD have fewer failures, more peace of mind, and less claims.

I'd start with the ABI public relations people.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I am not convinced that there is anything original left to discover here. etc

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree - and add that some forumites are perhaps making a quantum leap from their own positions of not understanding to assuming that the professionals don't understand either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top