Editing Naval architecture (section)

==Science and craft==
[[File:Ship lines (3D design).PNG|thumb|Smooth ship lines]]
Traditionally, naval architecture has been more craft than science.  The suitability of a vessel's shape was judged by looking at a half-model of a vessel or a prototype.  Ungainly shapes or abrupt transitions were frowned on as being flawed.  This included rigging, deck arrangements, and even fixtures.  Subjective descriptors such as ''ungainly'', ''full'', and ''fine'' were used as a substitute for the [[Hull (watercraft)|more precise terms]] used today.  A vessel was, and still is described as having a ‘fair’ shape.  The term ‘fair’ is meant to denote not only a smooth transition from fore to aft but also a shape that was ‘right.’  Determining what is ‘right’ in a particular situation in the absence of definitive supporting analysis encompasses the art of naval architecture to this day.

Modern low-cost digital [[computers]] and dedicated [[software]], combined with extensive research to correlate full-scale, [[towing tank]] and computational data, have enabled naval architects to more accurately predict the performance of a marine vehicle. These tools are used for [[Stability conditions (watercraft)|static stability]] (intact and damaged), dynamic stability, resistance, powering, hull development, [[structural analysis]], green water modelling, and slamming analysis. Data are regularly shared in international conferences sponsored by [[Royal Institution of Naval Architects|RINA]], [[Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers|Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME)]] and others. [[Computational Fluid Dynamics]] is being applied to predict the response of a floating body in a random sea.