Marine Technology, Vol. 32, No. 3, July 1995, pp.

197-208

SM Racer wins the Cowes Classic Powerboat Race in 1993 at the record speed of 91.76 mph

SM Racer: Design and Operation of One of the World's

Fastest Monohulls
Brunello Acampora 1

Powerboat racing goes back to the beginning of the century, but offshore racing as we know it
today started in the 1950's. The natural evolution of the sport led in 1990 to the birth of the
Endurance class, intended for extended races on long offshore routes. This paper introduces
Endurance racing and describes the design and practical operation of a powerboat, the SM Racer,
expressly built for this kind of competition.

Introduction W h i l e there is a p u r e l y sportive side of the g a m e of pow-

erboat racing, which not everyone m i g h t like or enjoy, which
POWERBOATr a c i n g is often considered a hobby for rich men is true for any kind of racing, the a u t h o r is m a i n l y i n t e r e s t e d
t r y i n g to show off with little or no i n t e r e s t paid to the sport in the technological a d v a n c e m e n t connected to the sport.
from a p u r e l y scientific viewpoint. Racing is the obvious in- A w i n n i n g raceboat is one which is faster t h a n last y e a r ' s
s t r u m e n t by which to m e a s u r e the technical innovations of winner, even if by only a fraction of a percent, b u t still faster.
the sport and to compare t h e different ideas and solutions for This is the g u a r a n t e e for the constant d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e
the quest for speed at sea. sport. The technological feedback from the r a c i n g scene into
the production of pleasure, m i l i t a r y and commercial vessels
could be, and often is, tremendous.
1 Victory Design, s.r.l., Torino, Italy. The E n d u r a n c e races, born to promote long open sea races
Paper presented at the March 10, 1994 meeting of the New York on monohull vessels, could be a discipline w i t h almost i m m e -
Metropolitan Section of THE SOCIETY OF NAVAL ARCHITECTS AND MA- diate innovative feedback to the m i l i t a r y a n d commercial
RINE ENGINEERS. industry.

JULY 1995 0025-3316/95/3203-0197500.49/0 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 197

 This p a p e r describes the design of a 48 ft racing monohull, Nowadays t h e r e is not a single monohull into offshore rac-
the SM Racer, specifically intended for the E n d u r a n c e type of ing, except for the A m e r i c a n S u p e r b o a t "V" class, and the
competition, o u t l i n i n g all the m a i n design stages, the tech- new so called "Endurance" r a c i n g in Europe: in these two
nical problems and the solutions adopted. The vessel was categories, only monohulls can be entered.
t h e n tested and raced, often with the designer on board, pro- Very briefly, the A m e r i c a n s decided to split t h e monohulls
viding a u n i q u e o p p o r t u n i t y to verify, in actual o p e r a t i n g from the c a t a m a r a n s , in the S u p e r b o a t category (no l i m i t of
conditions, all the ideas incorporated into the design. power or capacity), so t h a t who w a n t e d to race with mono-
hulls could keep doing it, without h a v i n g to m e a s u r e a g a i n s t
1. Evolution of offshore racing catamarans.
E n d u r a n c e r a c i n g is something different in as much as it is
The history of powerboat r a c i n g goes back to the b e g i n n i n g based on the philosophy of promoting t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of
of the century, both in Europe and in America, with races faster and safer production powerboats which, a n y w a y , the
such as the Algeria-Mahon-Toulon in 1905 (395 n.m.), the rules assume to be only monohulls. A p a r t from the declared
London-Cowes in 1906 (180 n.m.), the New Y o r k - B e r m u d a objectives, the impression is t h a t the people who conceived
from 1907 to 1913 (665 n.m.) and the M i a m i - G u n Cay in 1907 and organized the first real c o n t e m p o r a r y e n d u r a n c e race,
and 1917 (50 n.m.). Still, offshore r a c i n g as we know it today the "Venice-Monte Carlo 1990," w a n t e d to b r i n g offshore rac-
was probably born in 1956, w i t h the first edition of the Mi- ing back to the original concept, i.e., long routes in open seas
a m i - N a s s a u race, won by the l e g e n d a r y S a m Griffith. F r o m on powerboats which had to be s e a w o r t h y even if with some
t h a t m o m e n t onwards, it was clearly understood t h a t these compromise on pure speed. They synthesized all this in one
kinds of races required and promoted b e t t e r designed and word: monohulls.
b u i l t boats, able to s u s t a i n high speed in rough conditions. If one has to compare powerboat racing to car racing, it
Up to t h a t moment, most of the p l a n i n g hull developments could be said t h a t offshore stays to E n d u r a n c e roughly as
were due to the m i l i t a r y r e q u i r e m e n t s d u r i n g the F i r s t and F o r m u l a 1 stays to rallies.
Second World Wars. E n d u r a n c e is therefore a n evolution in the history of pow-
In 1958 R a y m o n d H u n t ' s first "deep-V" hull made its ap- erboat r a c i n g in an a t t e m p t to recover the original m e a n i n g
p e a r a n c e in Newport, USA, while in I n d i a a n o t h e r b r i l l i a n t of the sport. It is a new kind of r a c i n g which obviously needs
a e r o n a u t i c a l engineer, Renato "Sonny" Levi, was experi- new and different rules and regulations, which are a l w a y s a
m e n t i n g with s i m i l a r hull configurations. m a t t e r of discussion. As usual, one of the major conflicts is on
The "deep-V" hull design was probably the single most how to compare diesel and petrol powered boats, and some
i m p o r t a n t a d v a n c e m e n t in high speed t r a v e l at sea on plan- politics and commercial i n t e r e s t s are a l w a y s involved.
ing crafts. This new configuration, characterized by high Enough to say t h a t so far the rules have undergone substan-
deadrise values at the t r a n s o m (20 to 25 deg approx.) and t i a l changes every year, and the recognition of E n d u r a n c e
longitudinal "spray s t r a k e s " or "risers," was the logical evo- r a c i n g from the I t a l i a n Powerboating Association (F.I.M.) in
lution of the e a r l y flat-bottomed warped p l a n i n g hulls. 1992 actually seemed to a g g r a v a t e the situation.
It was therefore d u r i n g t h e sixties t h a t the design of plan- At present, the new 1994 set of rules give a net a d v a n t a g e
ing craft advanced more t h a n a n y other time in its history, to diesel boats, and it is easy to prove that, from a technical
basically because of the competition r e q u i r e m e n t s for faster, viewpoint, it would be almost impossible now to design a
safer, smoother boats. competitive boat for endurance racing u s i n g s u p e r c h a r g e d
Once the first "deep-V" hulls were introduced, t h e y were production petrol engines. As a direct consequence of this,
refined for a period of about ten y e a r s with tremendous im- the steering committee of the "Venice-Monte Carlo," in
provement in top speed p o t e n t i a l and sea keeping properties. strong d i s a g r e e m e n t with the new rules, decided t h a t the
U n d o u b t e d l y p a r t of the credit for this m u s t go to the avail- race should be r u n in 1994 with its own set of rules, which
a b i l i t y of l i g h t e r and more powerful m a c h i n e r y but, until the doesn't penalize petrol engines.
seventies, the n a v a l a r c h i t e c t u r e side was probably the driv- The steering committee for the "Venice-Monte Carlo" has
ing force behind this advancement. Two of the most signifi- decided t h a t should the I n t e r n a t i o n a l P o w e r b o a t i n g Associ-
cant boats of t h a t period were Surfury (1965), Levi's first ation (UIM) or F.I.M. not allow t h e race to be r u n w i t h an
Delta ( " . . . an elongated t r i a n g l e when seen both in p l a n independent set of rules, t h e n the race will not be run, leav-
view and p r o f i l e . . . " Levi (1971)) and l a t e r the Don Aronow ing the E n d u r a n c e racing c a l e n d a r without its most signifi-
b u i l t The Cigarette (1970). cant event.
F r o m t h a t m o m e n t onwards, say in the last 20-25 years,
very little has changed in high speed p l a n i n g monohull de-
sign, and the golden rules discovered t h r o u g h racing in the 2. Design objectives
Sixties, are basically still applied today.
Regardless of t h a t , top speed increased from about 65 knots The SM Racer was specifically designed a r o u n d the 1993
in 1970 to about 85 knots towards the end of the eighties; this E n d u r a n c e rules to be raced in the "P" (prototype) "2" (length
time the increase in performance was only possible because between 12 and 15 m) class. These rules for the first y e a r
of the constant developments on the mechanical and propul- introduced a new formula which, for each class, d e t e r m i n e d
sive side, with the introduction of more efficient power units, the m a x i m u m allowable power for a given length.
the stern drive and the surface piercing propeller. As a mat- It was clear from the b e g i n n i n g t h a t the owner, who was
t e r of fact, monohulls were now approaching t h e i r physiolog- going to t h r o t t l e the boat himself, w a n t e d an e x t r e m e vessel
ical limit, and several accidents seemed to prove that, at capable of an overall win. The objective was therefore to pro-
speeds a p p r o a c h i n g 85 knots, the "deep-V" configuration be- duce the fastest possible boat w i t h i n the given rules, capable
came u n s t a b l e both t r a n s v e r s e l y (chine walking), longitudi- of s u s t a i n i n g very high speeds even in rough conditions, w i t h
n a l l y (porpoising) and directionally (spin-out). a high degree of reliability, and capable of finishing a race
In a m a t t e r of t h r e e or four y e a r s the entire offshore racing even with p a r t of the propulsive p l a n t out of order. As if this
fleet converted to the c a t a m a r a n configuration which, origi- was not difficult enough, the rules called for the vessel to be
nally developed by the Italian Molinari family for circuit rac- approved by a recognized classification society, and t h e r e
ing, had been promoted for offshore racing by the British J a m e s were limits on the available project budget, as t h e r e was no
Beard and Clive Curtis, founders of Cougar Marine (UK). commercial sponsor at the t i m e construction began.

198 JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 A crew of t h r e e h a d to be carried: the t h r o t t l e m a n (the m a r i n e inboard petrol engines in Europe and one in the
owner, p l a y i n g the engines), the h e l m s m a n and the naviga- States, while so m a n y companies all over t h e world commer-
tor. Since from the b e g i n n i n g one could i m a g i n e t h a t we were cialize m a r i n e diesels which are derived from i n d u s t r i a l and
t a l k i n g of a boat capable of top speeds very close, if not above, automotive blocks. Also, the b o a t y a r d s are responsible for
the 100 knots b a r r i e r in open sea; this called for some kind of the construction of fuel t a n k s and systems, design of engine
crew passive safety device, in case of an accident. room vents and so forth: it is therefore much safer for t h e m to
The vessel's r a n g e had to be of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 230 n a u t i c a l sell diesel engine boats, where t h e i r m i s t a k e s will not have
miles at a cruising speed of 80 knots. severe consequences. It is in the author's opinion that, in
Europe, the use of petrol engines on small p l a n i n g p l e a s u r e
crafts (say up to approx. 15 m, 50 ft) needs to be promoted, as
3. Power package selection these units are lighter, smaller, cheaper and j u s t as safe as
t h e i r diesel equivalent, provided the i n s t a l l a t i o n is properly
The choice of the n u m b e r of engines to be fitted into the carried out. Also t h e y g e n e r a l l y have much b e t t e r power and
boat was to be based on r e l i a b i l i t y considerations, the re- torque curves t h a n t u r b o c h a r g e d diesel, while t h e a r g u m e n t s
q u i r e m e n t of the boat h a v i n g to finish a race even with p a r t of h i g h e r specific fuel consumption and fuel price are both
of the propulsive p a c k a g e out of order and last but not least, directly linked to hours of use per y e a r and g e n e r a l l y insig-
rules restrictions. The rules fixed the n u m b e r of engines, in nificant when compared to the i n i t i a l cost savings.
the prototype class, to a m a x i m u m of four; it was therefore While not everyone m a y agree with these ideas with ref-
possible to consider a t r i p l e or twin engine installation. The erence to the p l e a s u r e m a r k e t , in this specific case the objec-
engines had to be of s t a n d a r d production and approved by the tive was a race boat, so t h a t the a d v a n t a g e s of h a v i n g a
r e g i s t e r of classification, with no modification whatsoever l i g h t e r and s m a l l e r engine for the same power a l r e a d y were
permitted. very significant; a l i g h t e r i n s t a l l a t i o n also m e a n t l i g h t e r hull
The triple i n s t a l l a t i o n was discarded on the basis of the scantlings to deal with the h i g h i n e r t i a l forces involved. But,
n e g a t i v e influence t h a t t h r e e propellers would have on vessel perhaps more i m p o r t a n t t h a n a n y t h i n g else, the use of me-
l a t e r a l s t a b i l i t y at speed. Twin engines, which would seem to chanically supercharged petrol engines would allow for a re-
be the simplest and easiest choice, would not g u a r a n t e e the sponse on the t h r o t t l e s u n k n o w n to any diesel t u r b o c h a r g e d
required m a r g i n of power to complete a race, should an en- engine.
gine b r e a k down; also, as the designer was looking at a total It is necessary to explain here in more d e t a i l the d r i v i n g
installed power of about 3000 shp, both in the case of petrol technique involved with this k i n d of vessel. The most impor-
or diesel m a c h i n e r y , a l i g h t w e i g h t u n i t delivering 1500 shp t a n t m a n on board is the t h r o t t l e man; he is not j u s t s e t t i n g
was not a v a i l a b l e on the m a r k e t . the pace of the race, but also t r i m m i n g the b o a t in w h a t he
F o u r engines seemed to be logical choice. The vessel, believes to be the best t r i m for the sea conditions, with the
driven by four c o u n t e r - r o t a t i n g propellers would be t o t a l l y aid of t r a n s o m t a b s and a bow t a n k . Still, his m a i n job is to
balanced; in case of one engine b r e a k i n g down, 75% of the play the throttles in such a way that, as the boat flies out of
total i n s t a l l e d power would still be a v a i l a b l e to finish the the w a t e r and the propellers become airborne, he reduces the
race, and l i g h t w e i g h t units capable of d e l i v e r i n g around 750 revs on the engines, lessening the s t r a i n on all m e c h a n i c a l
shp were r e a d i l y available. components; b u t it is vital that, as the propellers are re-
As far as petrol or diesel was concerned, the owner a l r e a d y e n t e r i n g the w a t e r surface, full t h r o t t l e is applied a g a i n so
had very clear ideas, based on his previous experience in t h a t the hull cuts t h r o u g h the w a t e r surface w i t h o u t any loss
endurance r a c i n g with both engine types. He came to the of forward speed, much lessening the vertical impact forces.
conclusion t h a t petrol engines would be the best possible It is an e x t r e m e l y d e m a n d i n g technique, o r i g i n a l l y devel-
choice and he didn't w a n t a diesel boat. The designer and oped by A m e r i c a n S a m Griffith in t h e 1950's, which r e q u i r e s
owner a g r e e m e n t on this point was total, so t h a t the boat was e x t r e m e sensitivity and total concentration. The procedure
basically designed around a four-engine petrol installation. can be repeated, especially on short choppy sea conditions,
It m u s t be said t h a t if designer and owner both liked the v i r t u a l l y continuously, and it is vital t h a t t h e engines should
petrol option, t h e y a r r i v e d at this conclusion following differ- have g r e a t response to the throttle. Petrol engines are gen-
ent routes. The owner is basically a t r u e sportsman who e r a l l y b e t t e r t h a n diesels in this respect, because of the
doesn't j u s t w a n t to win, b u t enjoys r a c i n g a g a i n s t other pi- s m a l l e r rotational masses; but, above all, the m e c h a n i c a l su-
lots with different boats and technical choices; it is r a t h e r p e r c h a r g i n g system doesn't suffer from the typical discontin-
like horse racing, where some people j u s t w a n t to put t h e i r uous torque curve of diesel t u r b o c h a r g e d engines.
money on a known w i n n i n g horse, while others are r e a d y to The engine chosen was the M e r c r u i s e r H P 800 SC, a high
bet on an outsider which t h e y believe to have g r e a t potential. performance production unit w i t h full m a n u f a c t u r e r war-
In this p a r t i c u l a r case, the last two editions of the Venice to ranty, and an impressive r e l i a b i l i t y record m a i n l y due to its
Monte Carlo were won by diesel powered boats, both with the generous displacement (9.4 LT) and low s u p e r c h a r g i n g pres-
same engines and from the same d r a w i n g board: the owner sures. The unit delivers 750 shp/560 kW a t 5000 rpm, the
w a n t e d to win with different engines, and with a different m a x i m u m torque r a n g e is between 3500 and 4000 r p m and
boat. the fuel consumption is 264 L/hr (70 U.S. gal/hr) at Wide
The designer surely enjoyed this k i n d of philosophy (true Open Throttles (WOT).
s p o r t s m a n are e x t r e m e l y r a r e nowadays, at least in offshore
racing), but above all felt absolutely sure t h a t the project was
feasible and t h a t from a technical viewpoint, following t h a t 4. Engine room layout
route, a w i n n e r could be produced.
The I t a l i a n boating c o m m u n i t y doesn't generally like The i n s t a l l a t i o n of four engines d r i v i n g four drive u n i t s
petrol engines and looks at t h e m as a cheap option to diesel faces the designer with several options. In this p a r t i c u l a r
machinery; "for the money you save, you get an u n r e l i a b l e case, the goal was to get the shortest and n a r r o w e s t engine
and dangerous p a c k a g e full of electronics." The least one room layout, t r y i n g to keep the engine c r a n k s h a f t s symmet-
could say is t h a t t h e r e is some m i s i n f o r m a t i o n and prejudice. rical and as close as possible to the vessel centerline.
Several factors a r e responsible for this and one should re- A short engine room is r e q u i r e d because the o p t i m u m lo-
m e m b e r t h a t t h e r e is v i r t u a l l y j u s t one big m a n u f a c t u r e r of cation of LCG on these high speed monohulls, for m a x i m u m

JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 199

speed on flat waters, is as far aft as possible, and this l a r g e l y diately ruled out the idea of coupling two engines to a single
depends on m a c h i n e r y location. Also, i n t e r n a l drive shafts drive unit: from a p u r e l y efficiency viewpoint, this would
need to be k e p t as short as possible with much to be gained in have been no doubt the best possible choice.
t e r m s of r e l i a b i l i t y and w e i g h t of the components. As far as t h e a c t u a l drive system is concerned, several
In p l a n view, it is essential to keep the i n s t a l l a t i o n as close s t a n d a r d units a r e a v a i l a b l e on the m a r k e t , the two most
as possible to the vessel centerline, because the vessel b e a m i m p o r t a n t ones being the M e r c r u i s e r model VI stern-drive
will be mostly d e t e r m i n e d by the space required in the en- and the Arneson system, both m a n u f a c t u r e d in t h e U.S.
gine room. The Mercruiser system is basically a "Z" stern-drive
S y m m e t r y of the engines about t h e i r c r a n k s h a f t centerline mounted at such a h e i g h t t h a t the propeller works in a sur-
is required both for l a t e r a l balance of weights and for the face condition as described above; as on a n y other stern-
need to connect the engines to drives which will obviously drive, craft directional control is accomplished by s t e e r i n g
need to be s y m m e t r i c a l port and starboard; these drives, the actual unit, which has a fin r u d d e r incorporated a h e a d of
again, will need to be as close as possible to the keel so t h a t the propeller; the t h r u s t angle can be adjusted while under-
the propellers a r e the last t h i n g to leave the w a t e r and the way by t r i m m i n g the entire drive up or down. Propeller
first to reenter. counter-rotation and shaft speed reduction are accomplished
The chosen l a y o u t was a double staggered one, which sat- in the stern-drive g e a r i n g and a very acceptable 7% drive
isfies all the above listed r e q u i r e m e n t s , while leaving opti- t r a i n power loss has been recorded on d y n a m o m e t e r tests.
m u m space in the engine room for o r d i n a r y engine m a i n t e - While this system has proven its qualities in racing, for this
nance. p a r t i c u l a r i n s t a l l a t i o n the designer felt t h a t it was not leav-
ing enough freedom as far as propeller location, w i t h r e l a t i o n
5. Propeller design to the vessel's centerline, was concerned: the m e c h a n i c a l lay-
out of the stern-drive implies that, in plan view, the propeller
For r e a l l y h i g h speed p l a n i n g boats, the only feasible pro- should be in line with the engine, while in this case it was
pulsion system a v a i l a b l e today is one based on p a r t i a l l y sub- desirable to close the propellers as much as possible to the
merged surface-piercing propellers. vessel's centerline. Also, it was felt t h a t t h e weight of four
This system involves t h a t only p a r t of the propeller disk such units would be quite high, and the d r a g of four steering
a r e a is i m m e r s e d (roughly 50%), so t h a t shaft and b r a c k e t fins excessive when compared to two bigger r u d d e r s which, if
drag, often a h i g h percentage of the total resistance, is elim- located further aft in the propeller stream, could be even
inated. The propellers used are almost i n v a r i a b l y of wedge more effective. F i n a l l y , it m u s t be said t h a t in economical
type section, with the n u m b e r of blades g e n e r a l l y v a r y i n g t e r m s these drives were r a t h e r expensive w h e n compared to
from three up to nine. Not much published d a t a is a v a i l a b l e other options.
on the design of these propellers and in the offshore r a c i n g The Arneson is a p a t e n t e d drive system which employs a
field the two m a i n m a n u f a c t u r e r s of such propellers are Rolla propeller shaft tube connected to the drive t r a i n via a me-
SP (Swiss) and Mercury (USA); both produce i n v e s t m e n t cast chanical joint contained in a t r a n s o m m o u n t e d w a t e r t i g h t
high tensile steel propellers, b u t while Mercury only pro- spherical t h r u s t - b e a r i n g assembly, about which the drive can
duces t h e m for its own r a n g e of stern drives, Rolla SP will be steered and t r i m m e d . The u n i t is a v a i l a b l e both in direct
custom design propellers for a n y kind of application. For the drive or with a t r a n s o m bolted drop-down chain gearbox,
SM Racer, Philip Rolla designed four four-bladed surface pro- which permits propeller shaft speed reduction; also, and this
pellers, of which he gives the following description: was of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t to the designer, this drop box can
"The propellers for the S M Racer were four-bladed, 1.85 be m o u n t e d onto t h e t r a n s o m in such a position t h a t t h e
PD (pitch/diameter ratio), 15 deg b l a d e r a k e with skew to upper input side can be aligned with the engine in p l a n view,
give a s t r a i g h t t r a i l i n g edge profile, popularly known as while the lower propeller shaft side can be closer to t h e ves-
'cleaver' profile. The propellers were i n v e s t m e n t cast in sel's centerline, so t h a t the propellers can be located in a
ARMCO 17-4-PH steel, and had complete h e a t t r e a t m e n t cy- more favorable position. Vessel directional control is
cle in v a c u u m atmosphere. achieved basically in the same w a y as on the M e r c r u i s e r
The G e o m e t r y is exactly as had been tested at the High stern drive, as this unit also incorporates a s t e e r i n g fin a h e a d
Speed Free-Surface C a v i t a t i o n Tunnel at the Technische of the propeller, so t h a t the same considerations about d r a g
U n i v e r s i t a t Berlin with Dr. K u p p a and the results in full apply; moreover, the actual h y d r a u l i c s and t i e - b a r a s s e m b l y
scale r u n n i n g of the SM Racer were exactly as predicted from required to steer four of such units would be r a t h e r compli-
the testing. Efficiency of the propellers from the KT, KQ, cated and heavy.
ETO curves was 0.745 r u n n i n g at 40% submergence. It was decided to custom design a drive system that, based
The vertical force of the propeller, as predicted from the on the Arneson principle, would be incorporated into t h e aft
t e s t i n g on the six component d y n a m o m e t e r , were also calcu- p a r t of the vessel with the shaft lines fixed both in the ver-
lated and balanced with the h y d r o d y n a m i c forces of the hull tical and horizontal planes. S t e e r i n g would be accomplished
for an o p t i m u m r u n n i n g angle of a t t a c k at high speeds. by m e a n s of two spade r u d d e r s located well astern, aft of the
No modification was necessary to the propellers as ma- propellers, while the t h r u s t line angle could only be adjusted
chined and m o u n t e d on the S M Racer, this being the best d u r i n g testing, or before each race, by s h i m m y i n g the special
d e m o n s t r a t i o n of the v a l i d i t y and accuracy of the cavitation "A" b r a c k e t s supporting the shaft tubes. The designer felt
t u n n e l tests, and the absence of any scale effect. The model t h a t this system would be much simpler, l i g h t e r and more
test propellers were done in the same steel and machined reliable, while the aft r u d d e r s would allow for a d r a g reduc-
with the s a m e p r o g r a m as the actual propellers so as to be as tion compared to the s t a n d a r d steering fins plus b e t t e r direc-
accurate as t h e real propeller and the steel used insured no tional stability and steering action, as t h e i r center of pres-
deformation in r u n n i n g on the e x t r e m e l y thin models" sure would be located f u r t h e r aft of the vessel's pivoting
(Philip Rolla). point. Also, the s t r u c t u r a l drives and r u d d e r s support could
be used to accommodate items which otherwise would have to
go into the engine room (batteries, holding t a n k s etc.) and
6. VDD 3000 drive system
there was even space for two additional small fuel t a n k s , so
The required vessel r e l i a b i l i t y , plus the need of completing t h a t LCG could be shifted f u r t h e r aft for o p t i m u m flat w a t e r
a race even with p a r t of the m a c h i n e r y out of order, imme- performance. F i n a l l y , this l a y o u t allowed the design of spe-

200 JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

cial rudders which incorporate the engine cooling water pick- a final decision on machinery selection was made, it was
ups, which are so placed in the lowest possible point of the possible to solve for L in the equation; 3000 shp therefore
boat. This custom drive layout was named Victory Design required a minimum hull length of 13.02 m. As the objective
Drive 3000 (VDD 3000). was for the fastest possible boat it made sense to fix the
The actual drive train, while using the original Arneson's length at a value of 13.07 m, just stretching the vessel 0.05 m
spherical thrust-bearing unit, was completely redesigned to allow a margin which would avoid discussions with the
and manufactured by Italian BPM. The main differences be- race official measurers.
tween the original Arneson components and the BPM man- It should be stressed that this is the effective hull length,
ufactured ones were the length and material of the shaft from the actual transom, where the drive units are attached,
stern tubes, which were lengthened so as to locate the pro- to the foremost part of the hull, excluding any bow pulpit or
pellers further aft, and machine milled out of solid alumi- s-shaped bow. This appears to be a sound rule, which avoids
num-magnesium alloy, with three inner needle roller bear- cheater-bows while at the same time promoting a cutaway
ings supporting the propeller shaft, instead of the original forefoot which, if proper deadrise values are maintained is
two; also, the transom mounted gear boxes employed a full ideal for very high speeds. The final hull overall length of the
gear system, doing away with the original chain system and S M R a c e r was 14.67 m (48.1 ft), including the aft drive sup-
allowing for propeller shaft counter-rotation. These units porting overhang.
proved to be a real masterpiece of engineering, being ex- A preliminary estimate showed that the vessel design
tremely light and totally reliable. weight should be between 5500 kg (dry) and 7500 kg (with
On the possible benefits of the VDD 3000 configuration, it full fuel tanks). A simple Barnaby-Levi approach indicated
was realized t h a t the lower face of the drives supporting that the expected V / V L would be on the order of 17, which is
structure could be shaped in such a way that not only would equivalent to a beam based Froude number of about 10. The
it help the vessel getting onto the plane, but also act as a trim first consideration was how to retain equilibrium at these
control surface t h a t is normally well clear of the water but, speeds.
on a sudden bow wave encounter, comes in contact with the
surface, providing a bow down balancing moment which
makes the vessel fly with a level attitude. 8. Chine beam
The VDD 3000 Drive System is a direct development of the
Chine beam is one of those parameters where the designer
70's Renato "Sonny" Levi patented "Step Drive," incorporat-
ing basically all the concepts originally developed by this must really seek an optimum compromise between conflict-
undisputed master. ing requirements. From a hydrodynamic viewpoint, consid-
ering the lifting area required at the speeds and loading un-
der consideration, it is clearly evident t h a t chine beam
7. Hull design should be minimal for optimum performance. This is demon-
strated in practice by the high performance of racing cata-
The 1993 Endurance rules, for the first time introduced marans which employ extremely narrow hulls. As the top
into this kind of racing a p a r a m e t e r correlating hull length to speed is largely dependent on power to weight ratio and
the maximum power which could be installed. For the Pro- weight is to be minimized, from a structural viewpoint, again
totype class, this relationship was given by the following for- chine beam should be as little as possible. In practice, the
mula: designer is fighting against the most obscure area in ultra-
high speed monohull design which is transverse dynamic sta-
P = [(L - 9) × 20 + 150] × L bility (chine-walking). While several theories have been for-
where P is power, shp, and L the hull length in meters. mulated, nothing seemed to give sensible results at the
This is the equation of a parabola, which basically allows speeds under consideration. Chine beam is obviously one of
more power per meter as length increases, trying to account the main factors in the transverse stability equation, to-
for the nonlinear increase in structural weight with length. gether with the deadrise angle and resulting location of the
Already at a preliminary design stage, the designer and vertical center of hydrodynamic lift, vertical location of the
the owner were looking at an approximate hull length of over center of gravity and transverse weight distribution.
40 ft as this was considered to be the minimum acceptable for Another limit towards chine beam reduction comes from
handling rough seas at the speeds under consideration. After the space required to physically install the propulsive ma-
chinery. All these conflicting requirements led the designer
towards a LIB ratio of approximately 5. While it cannot be
said that beam selection was operated on a purely empirical
basis, it must be stressed that, as in many other areas of

' i. . . . . . . .
Y naval architecture, the designer could not derive a simple
equation taking into account all the different aspects of the
problem; this is therefore an area which would ideally re-
quire some scientific investigation, involving an experimen-
tal rig where variables could be systematically changed and
the resultant behaviors recorded and analyzed.
3000

2000 9. Deadrise
Deadrise selection on a "deep-V" hull is again connected to
I000
several factors, the governing ones in this case being design
speed and prevalent sea conditions.
0 A collection of data from existing vessels will show how
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
deadrise (measured at the transom) is normally gradually
L(M0 increased with speed, with values ranging from about 15 deg
The 1993 Endurance power-length rule (P2 class) for the heavier, slower boats up to 25 deg or more for the

JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 201

light, fast ones. Levi, who is probably the single most expe- at a more favorable angle of attack and have a higher aspect-
rienced and influential designer in the field, in ref. 1 deals ratio, while a wetted area reduction is possible because of the
with the possibility that at very high speeds a deadrise re- flow detachment at the step. Some "rocker" is usually built
duction over the recommended values might be desirable in into the aft planing step, i.e. this surface is set at a lower
terms of pure efficiency. Again, this seems to be confirmed by angle of attack with reference to the base line; this is mostly
the relatively low deadrise values found on offshore racing done for top speed considerations, to reduce the lift aft and
catamarans, but in this case the vertical impact forces are therefore mitigate the tendency to a flat running trim, but
cushioned by the considerably high tunnel aerodynamic pres- also helps in following seas where bow response is required.
sures. On the negative side, "rocker" will almost invariably intro-
For the S M Racer, while the mean deadrise value was duce, again, a slight porpoising motion at a well defined
slightly below the typical 25 deg, the designer adopted con- speed; this time the problem, caused by a slight unbalance of
vex transverse sections which effectively reduced deadrise the forward and aft lifting forces, is of minor concern and is
towards the keel and increased it towards the chines. This easily cured by the application of a small angle of attack on
shaping of the running surface also affects the flow pattern so the trim tabs, effectively increasing the lift of the aft section
that the center of hydrodynamic lift is shifted forward (com- and balancing the system.
pared to straight sections), while helping flow separation of Step geometry is a highly complicated area of the design
the spray rails. which is based on semi-empirical basis, where the designer's
experience and personal feelings have a lot of influence. The
designer found the most interesting reading about the sub-
10. Stepped hull f o r m ject to be some pre-war books dealing with the design of fly-
ing boat hulls and floats; the problems there were slightly
For a given deadrise, lift is a function of speed, planing different, but the basic line of reasoning could still be useful.
area and angle of attack so that, as speed increases, either Generally speaking, it is felt that steps will increase the
planing area or the angle of attack, or both, will have to vessel's average resistance in rough conditions, when the
decrease to produce the same amount of lift (approximately boat is often airborne and, on water re-entry, the aft vertical
equivalent to the vessel weight, at very high speeds). face will not be ventilated, causing a peak of resistance due to
On a prismatic deep deadrise hull, because of its shape, a the low pressures generated in that area of the hull. Ducting
substantial reduction in planing area is possible as the vessel air to the vertical face of the step is in theory an excellent
lifts bodily out of the water; this allows for a lower rate of idea, but somehow difficult to arrange, especially on compos-
angle of attack reduction with speed, when compared to a flat ite boats where cutting holes in the hull shell is structurally
bottomed hull, and consequent better L/D ratios. Neverthe- very undesirable.
less, for equilibrium, as speed increases the waterplane will A configuration employing a great number of very short
still need to lengthen so that the longitudinal center of pres- steps would probably be extremely fast on flat waters, but
sure (LCP) is always vertically in line with the longitudinal inefficient in rough conditions. Conversely, a single step is a
center of gravity (LCG); therefore, the tendency is for the feasible proposition, except that it is a less forgiving layout,
waterplane area to get narrower (until a point where even where the surfaces angle of attack and longitudinal step lo-
the chine is dry) and longer. This shape is both inefficient in cation with reference to LCG need to be absolutely right, the
terms of resistance (.low aspect ratio and shallow angle of risk being that the vessel will be bouncing from one step to
attack, with consequent high wetted area and frictional drag) the other if the system is unbalanced; also, as two points of
and dangerous in terms of directional stability (forward lo- contact are the minimum required for maintaining equilib-
cation of the center of lateral pressure, CLP), while the wet- rium, should the forward step become dry, the sudden shift of
ted beam reduction has a negative effect on lateral stability. LCP aft would cause a powerful bow down moment which
Furthermore, as the steeper bow buttock lines touch the again might promote porpoising.
water's surface, a sudden shift forward of LCP will cause a Three points of contact, and therefore two steps, seemed to
bow up moment which will almost instantaneously lift the be a good compromise between balance of forces, drag expe-
bow well clear of the water, while simultaneously increasing rienced in both flat and rough conditions and above all it
the angle of attack of the aft planing surfaces: this, in turn allowed, when compared to a single step geometry, more free-
will violently shift LCP aft of LCG, starting a rhythmic dom in trimming the hull while underway by shifting LCG
pitching action (porpoising). Moving LCG as far aft as possi- and/or LCP.
ble, while improving things both in terms of resistance and While trim tabs and bow ballast tank are essential for
stability on completely flat waters, will also produce exces- getting maximum performance on different sea conditions,
sive bow response to external forces, so that the sudden en- such a hull shape does not necessarily require, unlike its
counter with a wave will make the craft airborne and, in the unstepped counterpart, a variable thrust drive system. This
best case, initiate the porpoising action. While trim tabs and does not mean that such a system would be of no use at all,
bow tanks are essential, they do not solve the basic problem but simply that if other considerations discourage its adop-
of such a hull configuration; the most effective system is a tion, the basic performance and stability of a properly de-
variable thrust line system, where it is possible, within some signed stepped hull will not be compromised by a fixed drive
extent, to balance the hull longitudinally into the most de- configuration.
sirable trim for the particular sea conditions; this must in-
volve a loss in propulsive efficiency, as the thrust vector is not
used purely to propel the vessel. It is interesting to note that 11. S p r a y rails
virtually all American racing or fast pleasure monohulls,
which generally employ an unstepped "deep-V" hull, use Spray rails are vital to both performance and handling
some kind of variable thrust line drive system. properties, exactly as on an unstepped deep-V hull; as it is
To solve the problem, two transverse steps were incorpo- now well known, these longitudinal strakes, of triangular
rated into the S M Racer hull. The basic concept was to have cross section and generally horizontal lower face, basically
a middle surface close to the LCG, with the forward and aft provide lift and promote flow separation reducing wetted sur-
portions of the hull stabilizing the craft longitudinally; also, face area and hence frictional drag. While everybody gener-
the hull is running on three areas of contact which can be set ally agrees that in the aft body they should run parallel to

202 JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

the keel, several different contours have been tried in the m a y be worthwhile incorporating a topside s p r a y r a i l or
forebody, from along the w a t e r l i n e s to the diagonals and the knuckle to encourage flow s e p a r a t i o n should the boat be
buttocks. In the first case, the excessively low angle of a t t a c k h e a v i l y rolled. This feature was incorporated in t h e design of
will produce poor lift (bow response), while the exposed ver- the S M Racer.
tical faces promote directional i n s t a b i l i t y (risk of broaching).
Following the buttocks places the r a i l s at an excessive angle 13. Safety
of a t t a c k with h i g h drag, poor lift and little spray suppress-
ing effect. There seems to be p l e n t y of theory and practical The sport of power boating, as all disciplines involving hu-
applications to s a y t h a t the best solution is to run t h e m m a n s t r a v e l l i n g at h i g h speed, from skiing to F o r m u l a Indy
r o u g h l y p a r a l l e l to the chine, carefully considering both the racing, does involve a component of risk, a l m o s t a l w a y s con-
widths (taper) and deadrise angles needed towards the bows. nected to a loss of control of the vehicle employed. It is not
A p a r t from resistance considerations, spray rails will im- intended here to t r y to u n d e r s t a n d w h a t a good pilot should
prove vessel d y n a m i c roll stability, as the bottom faces on the do to p r e v e n t an accident, especially as the r a c i n g environ-
depressed side will have a g r e a t e r angle of incidence. m e n t introduces several v a r i a b l e s difficult to evaluate.
C o n t r a r y to g e n e r a l principles, the designer decided not to The m e a s u r e s one can t a k e at a design stage are funda-
have s p r a y r a i l s in the aft body, other t h a n the chine rail, in m e n t a l l y based on active and passive safety criteria.
an a t t e m p t to keep the chine wet aft for t r a n s v e r s a l s t a b i l i t y Given for g r a n t e d t h a t the designer is m a k i n g a n effort to
considerations. The S M Racer had two spray rails per side in produce a vehicle which is as stable as possible, one m u s t
the forward p a r t of the hull, one on the middle surface and always consider the situation when the s y s t e m will not be
one aft. able to self-restore itself to a balanced situation, so t h a t pilot
action is required in order to r e e s t a b l i s h equilibrium. F u r -
12. Deck design ther t h a n that, the u n f o r t u n a t e e v e n t of a " n o n r e t u r n " situ-
ation where nothing else can be done to p r e v e n t the accident
A t the speeds these vessels operate, a e r o d y n a m i c lift and m u s t also be considered.
d r a g are of considerable significance. D r a g reduction possi- Therefore, the design of the S M Racer r e q u i r e d the inves-
bilities are l i m i t e d by other r e q u i r e m e n t s b u t clearly atten- t i g a t i o n of three levels of safety:
tion should be paid to producing the cleanest possible upper 1. Vessel p r i m a r y behavior (passive safety)
works, and in this case, care was t a k e n to m a k e changes in 2. Vessel reaction to crew corrective action (active safety)
cross sectional a r e a s as smooth as possible in accordance with 3. Crew protection in case of accident (passive safety)
an " a r e a rule" approach to m i n i m i z i n g pressure drag. Aero- The vessel p r i m a r y behavior and its reaction to crew cor-
d y n a m i c lift and, in p a r t i c u l a r , the l o n g i t u d i n a l center of lift rective actions are connected to hull shape, control surfaces
are of g r e a t e r significance, especially on those occasions size and design, c.g. location, weight distribution, free sur-
when the craft becomes airborne. It is h i g h l y desirable t h a t face effects and so forth; these points are discussed elsewhere
the boat "flies" in as level a n a t t i t u d e as possible, b u t with a in this paper, so t h a t here we will concentrate on the t h i r d
small tendency to pitch bow up. To achieve this, the center of point.
a e r o d y n a m i c lift should be close to, and forward of, the lon- Passive safety in case of an accident is an involved m a t t e r
g i t u d i n a l center of gravity. A simple flat deck profile will not which would in theory require the consultantcy of specialists
achieve this r e s u l t since the center of lift for such a configu- in the field. Still, these people are often so specialized in t h e i r
r a t i o n will be about 35% of length aft the stem. The desired own field, for example the car industry, t h a t t h e y have prob-
outcome is produced by incorporating convex c u r v a t u r e in lems in switching to an e n v i r o n m e n t with t o t a l l y different
the profile towards the after p a r t of the deck. This will lower problems and mechanics of the accident. Also, it m u s t be said
pressure over this a r e a and t h e n move the center of lift aft. t h a t successful passive safety design would r e q u i r e a lot of
A t t e m p t s have been m a d e to influence t r a n s v e r s e s t a b i l i t y e x t r e m e l y expensive full size testing, plus a lot of R&D work:
by the use of a e r o d y n a m i c aids in the form of wings set at a the budget and t i m e allowed for the complete design of a
d i h e d r a l angle. Such devices m a y have a beneficial effect on r a c i n g powerboat such as the one described in this paper,
l o n g i t u d i n a l a e r o d y n a m i c s t a b i l i t y but do not help trans- does not leave enough freedom for proper exploitation of the
verse s t a b i l i t y except p e r h a p s by increasing roll i n e r t i a and subject.
t h u s period. Wings set at a d i h e d r a l angle only promote roll Still, since from the first proposal drawing, the S M Racer
s t a b i l i t y when side slip velocities are r e l a t i v e l y large, a sit- m a d e use of an enclosed safety canopy with two roof m o u n t e d
u a t i o n t h a t should not arise for a surface vessel. A p a r t from access hatches. This system involves t h a t the crew should be
the additional d r a g created, a wing system will raise the seated into car r a c i n g style bucket seats a n d well s t r a p p e d in,
center of g r a v i t y and it is a m e a s u r e of t h e i r lack of effective- with a five-point quick release h a r n e s s system. S e a t i n g t h e
ness t h a t those boats t h a t are fitted for t h e m u s u a l l y remove crew and r e s t r a i n i n g their m o v e m e n t allows the reduction of
t h e m for races t h a t are to be r u n in other t h a n flat sea con- the volume of the canopy and its t r a n s p a r e n t a r e a to the
ditions. m i n i m u m required; this obviously increases its overall
A e r o d y n a m i c effects m a y influence t r a n s v e r s e stability, es- strength.
pecially in cross winds, if the deck to topside joint is incor- The canopy was shaped a r o u n d a molded polycarbonate
rectly treated. If this j o i n t is given a r a d i u s which is struc- optical screen a v a i l a b l e on the m a r k e t . This screen is m a n -
t u r a l l y (and aesthetically) attractive, t h e n it is possible t h a t ufactured in Texas, and is b a s i c a l l y a p o l y c a r b o n a t e shell
t r a n s v e r s e airflow will r e m a i n a t t a c h e d as the boat rolls. with an outer acrylic ply, for scratch resistance, bonded by a
Since the center of lift will be closer to the w i n d w a r d edge, u r e t h a n e film, for a final thickness of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 18 mm.
this will produce a s u b s t a n t i a l roll m o m e n t l e a d i n g to a se- Its compound shape f u r t h e r increases the i m p a c t resistance,
rious r i s k of capsize especially if the boat is airborne. S i m i l a r and the general b u i l d i n g technique is basically the same em-
effects m a y arise with a t t a c h e d w a t e r flows were the boat to ployed on F-16 fighter plane canopies (same manufacturer).
l a n d on its topsides r a t h e r t h a n bottom panels. Clearly it is The n o n - t r a n s p a r e n t p a r t of t h e canopy was b u i l t in com-
desirable to ensure t h a t both a i r and w a t e r flows will sepa- posite m a t e r i a l s , as was the rest of t h e boat, with carbon for
r a t e a t the lowest possible angles of a t t a c k and this is best overall r i g i d i t y and K e v l a r for i m p a c t resistance. The lower
achieved by k e e p i n g the deck edge to topside joint as sharp as p e r i m e t e r of this enclosed "bubble" was bonded onto the deck
possible. Excessive deck c a m b e r should also be avoided and it in way of s u b s t a n t i a l below-deck secondary structure; t h e aft

JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 203

side rests on the engine room b u l k h e a d while h a l f w a y actual canopy, and they can only open outward: this raises
through, between the two front pilots and the aft one, an the problem t h a t outside w a t e r pressure will fight a g a i n s t
i n t e r n a l stiffening composite frame was inserted. the crew or a frogman t r y i n g to open it; this is w h y the cock-
Two more t r a n s p a r e n t fixed windows were cut in the aft pit has to be floodable, even if at a slow rate. The problem of
sides of the cell, one port one starboard, for the aft seated the hatch locking system is more involved, as a s y s t e m is
pilot side visibility; these two side windows were m a d e of 19 required which should be e x t r e m e l y easy to operate both
m m Plexiglas, on account of t h e i r s m a l l e r a r e a and, in the- from inside and outside, while at the same t i m e being able to
ory, less exposed position. keep the hatch securely closed u n d e r n o r m a l conditions.
N o r m a l l y , on all other offshore r a c i n g powerboats employ- After some research, it was decided to design a custom
ing s i m i l a r protection systems, the t r a n s p a r e n t surfaces are made latch, based on a spring operated bolt, which could be
fastened to the rest of the canopy by t h r o u g h bolting onto a opened by pulling a wire r u n n i n g along the entire length of
r e s t i n g flange. The designer did not believe that, on impact the hatch inner surface, which could be easily grabbed even
loading, this would be a satisfactory solution, as it is very in a panic situation; the spring action of a t h i c k r u b b e r seal
likely t h a t cracking would p r o p a g a t e from the actual fasten- around the edge would then avoid the h a t c h locking a g a i n
ing holes because of excessively rigid local r e s t r a i n t , where once tension from the wire was released. F r o m the outside, a
the polycarbonate or t h e composite bolting flange would h a v e red h a n d l e would be connected to the same l a t c h t h r o u g h a
to give a w a y before the a c t u a l bolt. Also, a l r e a d y d u r i n g the small hole, so t h a t all one has to do is to pull it. In n o r m a l
screen installation, it was more t h a n possible t h a t over tight- conditions, to close the hatch t h e r e is a small h a n d l e from the
ening of one or more bolts could d a m a g e the screen; large inside, so as to apply enough pressure to squeeze the peri-
washers would improve, b u t not a l t o g e t h e r solve, the prob- metrical r u b b e r seal.
lem.
It was therefore decided t h a t no d r i l l i n g of the screen and
the flange should t a k e place, and bonding would rely on mod- 14. Structural design
ern elastic adhesive technology, using a p o l y u r e t h a n e based
product. The adoption of such a system seemed to b r i n g the A successful s t r u c t u r a l design, while a l w a y s of the u t m o s t
following benefits: importance, was absolutely v i t a l for this p a r t i c u l a r project,
as hull weight and position of the actual vessel's center of
- - Total e l i m i n a t i o n of stress peaks, typical of mechanical
g r a v i t y had to be located exactly where it was decided at the
j o i n i n g techniques
p r e l i m i n a r y design stage. On top of that, while r e s e a r c h i n g
-G r e a t tolerances allowance (up to 5 mm) in screen to
-

m a x i m u m lightness, the structure had to be approved by a

flange connection, w i t h v i r t u a l l y no loss in tensile s h e a r
classification society (in this case the Registro I t a l i a n o Na-
s t r e n g t h of the adhesive l a y e r
vale) and if local m i n o r failures u n d e r p a r t i c u l a r l y demand-
- - Perfect j o i n t w a t e r t i g h t n e s s
ing conditions are somehow acceptable in a r a c i n g environ-
- F l u s h screen i n s t a l l a t i o n
-

ment, the n a t u r e of the project clearly faced the designers

- - Reduction of s t r u c t u r a l v i b r a t i o n s t r a n s m i s s i o n to the
with an e x t r e m e l y high "consequences factor." In other
screen
words, at the speeds under consideration, a n y serious struc-
- Much simplified i n s t a l l a t i o n
-

t u r a l failure m i g h t i m m e d i a t e l y progress to a c a t a s t r o p h i c
Also, the decision took into account that, in case of an state p o t e n t i a l l y leading to a loss of h u m a n lives.
accident, the system would only have to deal with an exter- W h e n dealing with advanced composite m a t e r i a l s u n d e r
n a l l y applied load, p u t t i n g the adhesive l a y e r almost e n t i r e l y e x t r e m e l y d e m a n d i n g conditions, it is essential t h a t special-
in shear, which is the most favorable loading condition for ists in the field are involved in the s t r u c t u r a l design. Victory
these p o l y u r e t h a n e bonding adhesives. Design s.r.l., in a s s e m b l i n g the design t e a m for this specific
A n enclosed cell of the type developed for the S M Racer is project, choose Mr. Luca Olivari, one of the world's l e a d i n g
m a i n l y intended to protect the crew from the impact with experts in the field, to be responsible for t h e s t r u c t u r a l design
water, should the deck come in direct contact with the sur- of S M Racer. Mr. Olivari h a d large previous practical expe-
face a t speed; this can h a p p e n as a consequence of nose-div- rience in the s t r u c t u r a l design and a n a l y s i s of composite ul-
ing, b a r r e l - r o l l i n g due to a sudden loss of directional insta- t r a - h i g h speed powerboats, m a i n l y Class I Offshore r a c i n g
bility, some k i n d of pitch-poling, or simply rolling over catamarans.
because of a resonance between the vessel rolling motion and The S M Racer was e n t i r e l y b u i l t in sandwich panels with
the encounter with a t r a i n of waves, not properly h a n d l e d by unidirectional glass, K e v l a r and carbon skins a r o u n d foam
the pilots: in all cases one can i m a g i n e t h a t the deck could cores of v a r y i n g densities and properties.
touch the w a t e r ' s surface w i t h the vessel still r e t a i n i n g its The project budget did not allow for the use of pre-pregs
full original speed; and it is u n l i k e l y t h a t , at the speeds in- and large q u a n t i t i e s of carbon fiber, so an epoxy resin wet
volved here, a h u m a n being could survive such an impact. lay-up technique with v a c u u m b a g g i n g and t h e r m a l post
There a r e some people who still are a g a i n s t enclosed safety cure was adopted. The decision not to use a full carbon struc-
cockpits, as t h e y fear t h a t the crew m i g h t be trapped inside ture was not only based on b u d g e t restrictions, b u t also on
after the accident, should the boat r e m a i n in a capsized po- overall impact resistance considerations, k e e p i n g in m i n d
sition. In this case, the only t h i n g one can do is to provide t h a t it was more t h a n possible t h a t the vessel m i g h t hit some
each crew m e m b e r in t h e cockpit w i t h a personal air bottle, floating object when at full speed. This l a s t consideration also
so t h a t t h e y can e i t h e r w a i t for some e x t e r n a l help (there is led to the introduction of specially designed core crack prop-
often helicopter assistance with frogmen r e a d y to help in agation barriers.
these races), or t r y to get out themselves; the real enemy, The successful operation of the S M Racer proved t h a t the
obviously, is panic. Things are further complicated if the l a m i n a t e analysis was absolutely r i g h t in showing t h a t it
crew is in an unconscious condition, b u t it is likely t h a t at was possible to have t h r e e widely different m a t e r i a l s as glass,
least one of t h e m will be able to help the others. Careful K e v l a r and carbon all working together. The final r e s u l t was
design of t h e h a t c h e s and t h e i r locking s y s t e m is r e q u i r e d to an extremely light, strong and stiff structure produced at a
be able to exit the vessel in a capsized position in the easiest very competitive price when compared to " t r a d i t i o n a l " high-
possible way. As far as the hatches are concerned, t h e y ob- tech composites construction.
viously need to be as big as possible, without w e a k e n i n g the As far as the bottom core selection was concerned, theoret-

204 JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 ically it was possible to use a n a l u m i n u m honeycomb which h a n d l i n g force 4 sea states at speeds of a r o u n d 75 knots,
could easily t a k e t h e predicted s h e a r stresses, but fatigue without a n y major s t r u c t u r a l failure.
resistance consideration in w a y of skin bonding and espe-
cially the r e q u i r e d m a t e r i a l "memory," i.e., the capacity of
t a k i n g locally applied loads h i g h e r t h a n those predicted 15. Trials
without going into the plastic state and s t a r t i n g a d e l a m i n a -
The SMRacer was rigged in Belgium and w e n t on t r i a l s on
tion process, suggested the use of an expanded PVC core. In
the 2nd of J u n e 1993 on the r i v e r Schelde. The vessel was
p a r t i c u l a r , a new high d e n s i t y cross-linked ductile type PVC
loaded with about 800 liters of fuel and in a v e r y l i g h t con-
had been developed, i n i t i a l l y for application on mine hunt-
dition as some components (life raft, fire e x t i n g u i s h e r s and
ers, with noticeably good fatigue resistance properties and an
the like) were not on board for these first runs. She floated
excellent 48% elongation at breakage.
exactly on her DWL when a t rest and this a l r e a d y showed
Impact pressures were calculated using the Allen-Jones
method, b u t employing different impact acceleration values t h a t our efforts in keeping LCG in a well d e t e r m i n e d position
h a d been successful.
derived both from previous experience (full scale recordings
with accelerometers on s i m i l a r vessels) and checking the re- A series of r u n s at very low speed (up to 40 knots) demon-
sults a g a i n s t the deformation of the bottom p l a t i n g of an s t r a t e d the vessel's capability of g e t t i n g very easily on to the
plane, with no help at all being required from the t r i m tabs.
a l u m i n u m Offshore Class 1 r a c i n g monohull of some y e a r s
ago. F i n a l l y , the total bottom structure was analyzed with These p r e l i m i n a r y r u n s were also necessary in order to check
all on-board i n s t a l l a t i o n s and for a m i n i m a l r u n n i n g - i n of the
finite e l e m e n t s at the design pressures.
machinery.
Considering t h a t the a v e r a g e bottom panel size between
stiffeners was about 0.7 to 0.8 square meters, based on the F i n a l l y , the S M Racer was brought, t h r o u g h some chan-
design pressures derived, the loading on each panel was ap- nels, to the broadest section of the r i v e r in the area, and t h e r e
p r o x i m a t e l y 12 000 to 15 000 k g (120 to 150 knots), i.e., a the throttles were opened to the m a x i m u m . The GPS re-
factor of 2 on the vessel weight. As the m i n i m a l impact a r e a corded a m a x i m u m continuous top speed of 103.5 knots
is going to be g r e a t e r t h a n at least two panels, it can be e q u i v a l e n t to over 119 mph, the boat being t o t a l l y stable both
deduced t h a t this loading included a high dynamic factor, as longitudinally and t r a n s v e r s a l l y . A t a speed of about 85
one would expect on this k i n d of vessel. knots a slight porpoising motion was recorded, b u t a s m a l l
The Factor of Safety on the SM Racer structures was positive angle of a t t a c k on the t r i m tabs, which did not seem
h i g h e r t h a n n o r m a l l y found on other r a c i n g boats. For exam- to affect the speed, d a m p e n e d the motion out completely. This
ple, if composite r a c i n g c a t a m a r a n s have a factor of safety m o m e n t officially concluded the design stage, w i t h the vessel
from 2 to 3, here, with the S M Racer, it w e n t from a mini- living up to the most optimistic predictions. The complete
m u m of 3 to 3.5. One of the Register r e q u i r e m e n t s which had absence of the chine w a l k i n g p h e n o m e n a on mirror-flat wa-
to be met was t h a t each s t r u c t u r a l e l e m e n t should have a ters and in a very light condition were, from a design view-
m a x i m u m deflection u n d e r its m a x i m u m design load not point, probably the most noticeable result.
g r e a t e r t h a n 1/200 of its span. It m i g h t be of interest to know,
t h a t as a m e a s u r e of the hull stiffness, finite element a n a l y s i s 16. V e n i c e to M o n t e Carlo, 1993
showed the m a x i m u m deflection m e a s u r e d at the keel to be
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5 m m with the full bottom design load ap- The boat was moved from B e l g i u m to I t a l y about t h i r t y
plied. days before the race start. D u r i n g this period a lot of f u r t h e r
P r e l i m i n a r y e s t i m a t e s showed that, should the boat be work was carried out, basically fixing p a r t of the on-board
built on m a l e molds, up to 200 kg of filler would be required systems which, d u r i n g trials, showed signs of w e a k n e s s or
to finish the hull outer surface, as one m u s t r e m e m b e r that, did not work as expected. Also, some porosity in the fuel
u n l i k e m a n y s a i l i n g or d i s p l a c e m e n t vessels, here the shell t a n k s caused a l e a k a g e which, while not w o r r y i n g a t all from
thickness varies a lot in different areas, and the aft p l a n i n g a p u r e l y technical viewpoint, involved re-opening the t a n k s ,
surfaces can be t h r e e t i m e s t h i c k e r t h a n the topside thick- losing precious t i m e for proper sea-trials which are essential
ness. It was therefore decided to build a direct plywood fe- for t u n i n g up such an extreme a n d innovative prototype as
m a l e mold and this technique proved to be feasible and very the SM Racer.
successful. But above all, the entire team, from the owner to the de-
S p r a y r a i l s were net molded into the hull in order to keep signer, were e x t r e m e l y busy fighting in court a g a i n s t the
the shell l a m i n a t e continuous and with m i n i m a l change of organizers of the 1993 E n d u r a n c e championship: the steering
orientation of the u n i d i r e c t i o n a l fibers. The final b a r e hull committee, a p p a r e n t l y with the support of the I t a l i a n Power
weight of the S M Racer, p a i n t e d and with the canopy and all Boating Association (FIM), h a d decided to change the rules
hatches, was a r o u n d 2500 kg. This m u s t be r e g a r d e d as a about twenty days before the s t a r t of the season, r u l i n g out
very good r e s u l t considering t h a t the vessel proved capable of the SM Racer from the competition. Only the strong t e a m
reaction finally solved the s i t u a t i o n as the application of t h e
new rules was postponed.
The day before the s t a r t of the race, a n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t test
was done as the vessel was r u n on t h r e e engines only, a n d a
very promising top speed of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 75 knots was
achieved in this condition.
~ s M RACER
Finally, on J u l y 21st the race started, in e x t r e m e l y r o u g h
/ T w e a t h e r conditions. The owner asked the d e s i g n e r to be on
board as the navigator, a chance at which he j u m p e d imme-
diately, more for the opportunity of checking p e r s o n a l l y the
results of his work t h a n for the pure p l e a s u r e of racing. The
I I I I I I i I tl I ~,
SM Racer led the pack until, after about t w e n t y minutes, the
I00 9o ao 70 so SO 40 30 2o I0 o w a r n i n g light from a bilge p u m p forced the crew to stop and
L'tt~. (O=IBOW')
check w h a t was going on in the engine room. Here it was
discovered t h a t the i m m e r s i o n type plastic p u m p s were

JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 205

.. , C
-33_ --@ . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..L

Profile and plan view

- ~,'F,L, '~r~Oq DRI,/K ~JL'.I ~ - [ILIIIIjL[ ~f,ur,'-i°E~= F P q l O II=

......................... .......................................................... -'t" ....

/f"

J/

.]
,q

\ -

Engine layout

smashed in bits and pieces because of the e x t r e m e l y high in a n y sea state, a series of m i n o r problems p l a g u e d this first
impacts. A p a r t from that, e v e r y t h i n g else was okay. The SM race. In particular, a s t r u c t u r a l w e a k n e s s of the gunwale in
Racer had lost some t i m e b u t the race could be continued. way of the engine room deck opening was discovered and t h e
After about a n o t h e r t h i r t y minutes, one of the h y d r a u l i c cast a l u m i n u m t r i m t a b s proved to be unexpectedly too weak,
steering system connections s t a r t e d l e a k i n g and at each im- cracking in several places and also d a m a g i n g the a c t u a l t r a n -
pact some oil was lost. The crew decided to slow down so as to som. While these weaknesses obviously were something
be able to finish the leg. Once in Giulianova, after about 185 which in theory should have been predicted at a design stage,
n a u t i c a l miles of race in a sea state of force 4 to 5, the S M it is i m p o r t a n t to point out t h a t this was by far the t o u g h e s t
Racer was second overall, a t twelve m i n u t e s from the first "Venice-Monte Carlo" to date, and the crew a l w a y s pushed
boat. Considering all the troubles incurred and the fact of the vessel to, and possibly above, its limits. It is p r o b a b l y a
h a v i n g slowed down so much for the second h a l f of the race, good indication of the toughness of the race t h a t the t h r o t t l e
the result was e n c o u r a g i n g for a b r a n d new race boat. m a n suffered a spine injury d u r i n g a p a r t i c u l a r l y h a r d w a t e r
This, a n d the following legs were, for the S M Racer, more reentry.
t h a n an a c t u a l r a c e - - t h e first real open sea t r i a l s which in A n o t h e r a r e a which showed some w e a k n e s s was the bond-
theory should have t a k e n place before the actual competi- ing of the wooden s p r a y r a i l s to the hull shell, a n d possibly
tion. not enough a t t e n t i o n was given to this detail, from a p u r e l y
While in g e n e r a l the vessel's behavior was always and by craftsmanship viewpoint, d u r i n g construction.
everybody, both crew and competitors, considered excellent Regardless of this, working overnight to s t a r t the next leg

206 JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 j r J/J

Victory Design Drive 3000

C.L 38CT ON

Cockpit layout

the morning after, the SM Racer was basically always in the

lead when some problem cropped up, and always managed to Views of propeller tests: (top) 40% immersion; (bottom) 50% immersion
finish the race at least in second place.
Finally, the SM Racer very convincingly won the Vibo Va-
lentia-Ischia leg, establishing the new record for Endurance Apart from the final sabotage, which is something very
racing at over 78 knots of average speed. During the night in difficult to accept or understand, this first race must be con-
Ischia, the S M Racer underwent an act of sabotage, as un- sidered very positive from a technical viewpoint, as the de-
known perpetrators damaged the inspection hatch gaskets to sign proved to be absolutely capable of fulfilling its initial
the fuel tanks. While the team decided to bring the vessel to objectives and the problems were of a minor nature.
Monte Carlo anyway, the SM Racer was practically ruled out Soon after the race the team started working on the trim
of the race. tabs and reinforced the gunwale aft and the spray rails bond-

JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 207

ing, getting the vessel r e a d y for the next race, the "Cowes four turbo diesel engines, giving about 850 shp each, were to
Classic '93." be installed.
It is hoped t h a t in the future the n a u t i c a l i n d u s t r y will
somehow support powerboat r a c i n g as a logical extension of
17. C o w e s C l a s s i c '93 scientific research and development activities.
This 33-year-old race is a milestone in the history of power
boating, and its previous w i n n e r s include some of the most Acknowledgments
influential p e r s o n a l i t i e s of the sport like "Sonny" Levi, Dick
Bertram, J i m Wynne, Don Aronow, Don Shead, J a m e s Beard This p a p e r has been w r i t t e n m a i n l y t h a n k s to the strong
and m a n y others. e n c o u r a g e m e n t and the v a l u a b l e help of W a y n e T h o m a s and
Pre-race tests showed t h a t the SM Racer was in perfect Rik v a n H e m m e n , to whom the a u t h o r is e x t r e m e l y grateful.
condition and a top speed of about 120 m p h was recorded in The SM Racer would not have been b u i l t w i t h o u t the en-
the Solent waters. thusiastic d e t e r m i n a t i o n of an exceptional owner, Sergio
This was basically the first time E n d u r a n c e boats e n t e r e d Mion, who never lost faith in t h e designer's work, even w h e n
the race, while its previous editions were dominated by Off- some problems cropped up. Both him and his d r i v e r and co-
shore Class 1 raceboats. The record for the race was held by owner, Giuseppe A m a t i , j u m p e d into this project d e t e r m i n e d
a petrol powered Class i c a t a m a r a n at 90.98 mph set in 1990. to build a new and innovative vessel, t a k i n g all the r i s k s
The m o r n i n g of the 29th of August, the race s t a r t e d from involved. T h a n k you for the faith you showed in me.
the Isle of Wight, in ideal w e a t h e r conditions. As u s u a l the The a u t h o r is also in debt to all the people which, in one
SM Racer took the lead, b u t almost i m m e d i a t e l y , for un- way or the other, contributed to the design and the construc-
known reasons, the GPS signal was lost. The crew decided to tion of this r a t h e r exceptional vehicle. The final r e s u l t proved
keep side-by-side with the n e x t fastest boat in order to be t h a t people fighting together for a common objective is v e r y
sure not to j u m p a n y race m a r k and s t a y e d in this position for powerful.
about t h r e e - q u a r t e r s of the race. Also, the t h r o t t l e m a n no- F i n a l l y , I would like to t h a n k all the people who t r i e d to
ticed a loss of power from two engines but, regardless of t h a t stop, several times and in several ways, the S M Racer; t h e y
fact, he was still capable of controlling the race. W h e n the only m a n a g e d to m a k e our motivation s t r o n g e r and give us
last buoy was turned, the t h r o t t l e s were opened to the max- more confidence in the vessel's potential.
i m u m and the S M Racer crew was easily first in Cowes, with
a twelve m i n u t e a d v a n t a g e over the second boat. The 184
nautical miles course h a d been covered in 2 hours 18 m i n u t e s Bibliography
and 14 seconds a t an a v e r a g e speed of about 80 knots (91.76 Acampora, B., "The Winged Monohull Configuration: Design of an
mph) which was also t h e new record both for the Cowes Clas- Experimental Two Litre Offshore Powerboat," I.D.Y. & B.D.,
sic and for E n d u r a n c e racing. The loss of power was con- Southampton Institute of Higher Education, U.K., 1988.
firmed after t h e race by the two forward engines h a v i n g lost, Acampora, B., "L'Evoluzione delle Imbarcazioni da Alta Velocit~ At-
a p p a r e n t l y e a r l y in the race, the s u p e r c h a r g e r driving belts; traverso la Competizione," 1st Symposium on High Speed Marine
Vehicles, Naples, Italy, 1991.
in this condition, the SMRacer had lost about 500 hp in total. Dalzell, S.M. and Acampora, B., "Ultra High Speed Monohulls,"
Advanced Design Symposium, Universit~ Degli Studi di Genova,
18. Conclusions Italy, 1993.
Levi, R., Dhows to Deltas, Nautical Publishing Company, 1971.
Practical operation r e s u l t s placed the S M Racer among the Levi, R., "Planing Craft Design and Performance," 8th Biannial
world's fastest monohulls at the time this p a p e r was written. Hiswa-Symposium on Yacht Architecture, 1983.
Levi, R., "Milestones in My Designs," Kaos Service s.r.l., 1992.
The most impressive side of this r e s u l t is t h a t the SM Racer's Du Cane, P.~ High Speed Small Craft, David & Charles, 1974.
basic i n g r e d i e n t s are not e x t r e m e components born for pure Savitsky, D., "Hydrodynamic Design of Planing Hulls," SNAME,
racing, b u t simply high performance items which could be 1964.
incorporated in a n y production boat, as the vessel carries full Savitsky, D. and Gore, J. L., "A Re-Evaluation of the Planing Hull
register classification and is r e g a r d e d by the a u t h o r i t i e s as a Form," AIAA, 1979.
n o r m a l p l e a s u r e boat. This proves t h a t today it would be Durand, W. F. Aerodynamic Theory, Vol. 6, Dover Edition, 1963.
possible to build a pleasure, m i l i t a r y or commercial vessel Flewitt, J.R., "Performance Prediction and Some Related Prob-
capable of a v e r a g i n g speeds close to 80 knots on r e l a t i v e l y lems," Combat Craft, 1983.
long (200 nm) offshore routes. Hadler, J.B., "The Prediction of Power Performance on Planing
It is feared t h a t E n d u r a n c e racing m i g h t not develop at the Craft," SNAME, 1966.
expected r a t e m a i n l y because of the shortsightedness of the Warner, Airplane Design--Aerodynamics, McGraw-Hill, New York,
1927.
rules imposed by the I t a l i a n Powerboating Association Kermode, A. C., Mechanics of Flight, Longman Group, U.K., 1987.
(F.I.M.), which are not, as one would expect, the result of Hadler, J. B. and Hecker, R., "Performance of Partially Submerged
discussions w i t h designers, builders, pilots and engine build- Propellers," 7th ONR Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, 1968.
ers. The excessive a d v a n t a g e given to diesel boats can be Lindenmuth, W. T. and Barr, R. A., "Study of the Performance of a
qualified by s a y i n g t h a t the SM Racer would now need to be Partially Submerged Propeller," Hydronautics Techn. Rep. 760-
19 m long (62 ft) to be allowed to use its c u r r e n t power pack- 61, 1967.
age, while t h e same hull could be r e t a i n e d if, for example, Desmond, K., PowerBoat Speed, Conway Maritime Press, Ltd., 1988.

208 JULY 1995 MARINE TECHNOLOGY