flaming
Well-known member
....With the assumption that no unseen stress mitigation was done. For example the cap thickness is not known, and nor is it known if it is even throughout, or greater at the areas of stress concentration.True, but his observations about stress concentrations were pertinent.
The only real known fact here is that the structure failed. What isn't known is what caused it to fail, whether that load had even been considered in designing the structure, whether if it had been considered it had been accurately modelled etc... Or if this was a load that was so far out of the norm that it would not have been reasonable to have predicted.
The thing I took from the pictures of the structure was that they clearly had very particular expectations of where the loads would be, as I can't believe that those cutouts were just random. So my feel is that the structure had more to do with supporting the deck under the various furler attachment points by being in tension than any compression loading. It could even be that by putting that structure in to take the loads of the furlers they have made the whole bow too stiff and that the pounding that the boat takes falling off its foils just created shock loads that were too much, simply because the structure wasn't dissipating any energy. But again, I'm not basing that on anything remotely scientific and my basic 1st year engineering compulsory structures module from 15 years ago in no way compares to the experience and qualifications of the people who actually designed the thing.