The design of a luxury superyacht tender based on the 12,3m RIB hull of Xtenders

Abstract

This project started with a visit to Xtenders where a tough model of a new concept came to my attention. This sketch looked different from at the time produced by Xtenders models and evoked some curiosity that emerged into the graduation thesis. Xtender is a Dutch brand that builds yacht tenders. The main advantage of the product has been defined by the used production technology. Carbon pre-preg laminate was used in combination with special curing system called Autoclave to produce the most parts of the tenders. Further, all tenders were custom built and required a modular approach to optimise the production costs. Back then Xtenders were only RIB (Rigid Inflatable Boats) tenders in their portfolio and we looking ahead to expand their portfolio. The idea came due to the high investment costs for new moulds to research the possibilities within the existing 12.3m RIB hull by extending it upwards. This way a new type of the boat would be created called Solid-Hulled boat. In order to realize significant results in the given time, a boundary has been set. Following constructives of the product design received the main attention: 1. First, strategical decisions had to be made to define the main aesthetic and functional qualities of the new tender. Extensive analysis of the brand, market of superyachting/tenders and defining the target group was performed to define the most opportune direction and attitude towards the technical and aesthetical approach. Main factors that influenced the choice of design direction were the dominance of the superyachts within the range between 50 and 80 meters that often need a multipurpose tender. This tender should be able to facilitate transportation during hospitality events and for leisure purposes such as day cruising and watersports. The same functionality package appeared to be missing on the market. Therefore the decision was made to pursue with this direction. In order to compose the design brief scenario mapping, based on the chosen design direction, was used. different user scenario’s were generated with the help of specialists from each field. Defining the user situations narrowed down the list of demands and provided accurate input for design. Despite clear focus, the design process had so many questions and challenges that they could hardly be addressed all at once. Muller’s “Fish-trap model” was used for the set-up of synthesis (Muller, 2002). Process included several ideation stages where choices were made to narrow down the design field. As the design brief defined a clear package of demands, first a “Structural concept” was created. It means that a global lay-out consisting of a certain amount of structural elements was defined by building a modular cardboard model and idea sketching to experiment and visualize the concepts. Multiple combinations were photographed and compared. Three main lay-out combinations appeared to cover the most combinations. These were weighed against each other to make the choice. Finally the lay-out to work with was placing an open roofed area above the engines in the back of the boat. The driver would be in the middle of the tender for the best overview and control and in front of the tender the toilette and main roofed guest area wold be arranged. After the lay-out was chosen, a new ideation phase addressed the partial problems and exterior. Choosing one concept was split into multiple stages due to the large scale of the project. After making the choices a Formal Concept was defined. In this concept the main guidelines for the lay-out, formgiving and dimensions received the most attention. Instead of the materialization of multiple concepts, the discission was made to choose one and apply two materialization rounds to it. At this stage ergonomics and definition of geometry were the main field of attention. Manufacturing, assembly, specification of materials, finishing, texture and colours were considered too. The material concept was worked out in 3D and presented to the company. Mi features of the tender were high freeboard, retractable roof and hinging transom. Modelling is the key to understand the design and detect pros and cons. To obtain the needed insights for the next materialization round and evaluate the concept, a 1:1 wooden mock-up was built. Ex,- and interior were simulated. Building the mock-up and seeing it grow provided important insights in the structure and flaws of the design. Afterwards an evaluation session with Xtenders was organized. During evaluating the tender some major changes were discussed. The lay-out had to be slightly changed b removing the toilette from the bow to the centre part of the tender. Further, multiple improvements of almost each part were revealed. Finally, the redesign was made using gathered feedback. A shorter yet in depth iteration for the structural and material conceptualizing was performed. The second materialization round delivered an impressive result. Not only the ergonomics improved, aesthetics and usability of the tender received attention too. The redesign is more dynamic and refined. Improvement by iteration in design has been acknowledged by all the stakeholders of this project.