4 Meter mono foiler project [Archive]

wind_apparent

04-27-2008, 10:23 PM

bistros

04-28-2008, 07:34 PM

so, I've been working on a 4 meter monofoiler formula for Lazy Americans like myself who would love to buy into the Moth foiler hype:p but don't want to hike anymore (trapeze), might be to heavy to competitively sail a boat that has 8sm of sail, but still want to go fast and fly above the water, (and who want a formula with a minimum weight so that things don't get to stupid, always fixing stuff, and blowing out, so homebuilders who cant deal with prepreg and an autocalv can still get going). I'm not a foil maniac, I just love the idea, there has been a lot of talk at my local pond about such a concept, (we all would build moths if it wasn't "so" little, and if we'd hiked on any boat since lasers in high school) its not "the peoples foiler" because your still going to have to work hard to sail it and stay out of the drink, and its going to be made out of carbon fiber, so it won't be cheap, but it will make foiling more accessible to normal sized people, not "average Joe" but average sized. Anyway, I've had a couple of threads about the rig for this warlock, but that question is now moot....anyway heres the formula as it stands so far, still working on the rig, so if anyone has any input about that or anything else, fire away. (please don't hijack this thread, if you don't like foilers, or doug lord (because you know he's going to bring it), just don't say anything,) please......

SR-71 4meter Foiler Formula

Single handed
LOA: 4m (+65cm gantry) (+ telescoping bow sprit if applicable)
BAW: 40cm min (Beam at waterline)
BAG: 75cm min (Beam At gunnel)
BAR: 2.4m max (Beam at rack)
SA: 10.5sm main
Max Mast Length::?: (still working on it) Ideas?
Trapeze: Yes
*no multihull or windsurfers*
*no kites*
asm spinnakers: if you want to open that can of worms, go nuts
*Open Foil Plan* (must be centerline mounted)

well there it is, have ater...........

Sounds interesting. Interesting that someone from Colorado is spec'ing metric!

As far as mast length goes, to maintain the possibility of foiling gybes and tacks from a trap, you are going to have to maintain a seriously open route from one side to the other - probably running across like a skiff, so keeping enough room under the boom is critical. There isn't time for Contender/Finn-like dives under a low boom. This will help define the mast length.

Are you considering a main+jib or a cat rigged main only? A jib wil help provide better initial rig balance, and get sail area lower with end plate effect. A self tacking jib that uses a SwiftSolo-like single sheeting system may be in order. I'd take a hard look at the SwiftSolo rig plan and the rigging developed over the past five years - it's now well refined and tested. Bill Hansen's sail developments which incorporate a lot of high speed windsurfer technology now applied to dinghies is worth a look as well.

I'm having Ethan Bixby of North make a sail for a high performance single handed skiff I've been working on - similar overall dimensions, but not intended for foiling - more of an I-14 for one. I'm using a Proctor D tube cut down slightly, and a carbon boom on a loose footed full batten chop top main. I chose the Proctor D for low cost, and the wealth of knowledge tuning sails for that tube. Big asymmetrical spinnaker - sail plan somewhat like a Musto Performance Skiff, but much lighter overall - the completed hull weighed 75 pounds before paint. Constructed from cedar strips and okume plywood in a stringer and frame design.

I live in a low wind venue, and we just don't get enough wind on a regular basis to build a boat around foiling.

Keep us posted.

Doug Lord

04-28-2008, 08:10 PM

joz

04-29-2008, 06:18 AM

wind_apparent

why don't you use the Int 3 metre Tri or even the 5 metre version to which would be more suitable for your needs.

wind_apparent

04-29-2008, 01:03 PM

Sounds interesting. Interesting that someone from Colorado is spec'ing metric!

As far as mast length goes, to maintain the possibility of foiling gybes and tacks from a trap, you are going to have to maintain a seriously open route from one side to the other - probably running across like a skiff, so keeping enough room under the boom is critical. There isn't time for Contender/Finn-like dives under a low boom. This will help define the mast length.

Are you considering a main+jib or a cat rigged main only? A jib wil help provide better initial rig balance, and get sail area lower with end plate effect. A self tacking jib that uses a SwiftSolo-like single sheeting system may be in order. I'd take a hard look at the SwiftSolo rig plan and the rigging developed over the past five years - it's now well refined and tested. Bill Hansen's sail developments which incorporate a lot of high speed windsurfer technology now applied to dinghies is worth a look as well.

Funny, I've spent the last couple of days researching the "swift" mast and boom, I figure if I used them I could just put the boom lower on the mast in a musto type fashion, thereby gaining the extra .53sm I need to fit my fourmula, since the bend and spreaders and trap are already worked out it would be easy to get the sail made and the whole thing up and running without much tooling cost and R&d time, could even get together with the swift guys for higher bulk discounts if this formula was to catch on.

thanks for the response, "like minds think thier great" I mean "great minds think alike":p

wind_apparent

04-29-2008, 01:15 PM

Build an RS600FF with a 10/1 L/B ratio (or skinnier) hull. Consider buoyancy pods even if they are removable after you get used to it. Even the Bladerider
has buoyancy bags under the wings. Tis a great thing you're doing-I wish you the best!

-Consider removable foil tips for light/heavy air
-definitely go with retractable foils(like the RS foiler).
- be sure to set up your main foil so that the angle of incidence can be varied on the water(like John Iletts "F Box").
-You MIGHT even consider getting a used RS and sail it for a while -then build the new one.

I have already designed "wing end training wheels" so I can have a trimaran to train on at first. they will just Ubolt to the rack and come off just as easy.they are like little surf boards. I have also designed regular foils so that I can get used to the boat before I put foils on it (not fast ones, just so the boat will sail).....Retractable hydros are in the works, (beach foiler).

as far as the RS600ff, not a fan of that boat , but that is where this idea originated, I wouldn't want to buy one, and where would the fun be in that ?
half the fun is building and designing, I want to do something no one has done. I know you can understand that

I don't know about the f-box, where do i go for info?

thanks doug.

wind_apparent

04-29-2008, 01:19 PM

wind_apparent

why don't you use the Int 3 metre Tri or even the 5 metre version to which would be more suitable for your needs.

tri's are an old idea, and to stable, i want to do something crazy;) mono foilers are what I'm into.........there are plenty of boats that are for everyone, the world dosen't need another laser clone. skiffs, fast cats, monofoilers, formula windsurfers, thats where its at for me.

Doug Lord

04-29-2008, 05:57 PM

WA, there is mention of the F box in an article on The Daily Sail* about Simon Paynes new Fastacraft Prowler "Zero". Go to "foilers" on that site.....The idea is to be able to change angle of incidence of the main foil by angling the vertical fin forwards or backwards-and to do it while out on the water. The advantage is to keep the foil operating at its lowest drag: Higher angle of incidence=bottom of vertical fin forward=light air, Lower angle of incidence=bottom of vertical fin aft=stronger wind.
*I may have posted a link to it in an earlier post in this thread.

wind_apparent

05-01-2008, 11:28 PM

so I've decided that my mast step location is going to be at 125cm back from the bow.....still working out the foil trunk location, I was thinking about 191cm back from the bow, but now I'm thinking about farther forward for stability after seeing the new foiling 18 skiff....er....a..... i mean 18foot oil rig....I've got to figure it out soon because its almost time to start putting my mold frame together.....

wind_apparent

05-01-2008, 11:30 PM

Doug Lord

05-03-2008, 02:42 PM

its a great idea, but I don't think I'm going to mess with it on this first proto type, got enough stuff to figure out and mess with......maybe on the next one....
----------------------------------------------------------
I don't blame you for not wanting to mess with it but consider making a "trunk within a trunk" for your main foil. That way you can add this facility later.
I'm not sure I posted the M4 for you yet or my aeroSKIFF(I'm building an almost identical but larger version now) so here goes. Note the "buoyancy pods:

Doug Lord

05-03-2008, 02:48 PM

I posted this on your Multihulls thread but thought it would be relevant(for reference) in this thread:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Some info that might help-the W/SA ratio for the Monnard design is under Peoples Foiler II. You'll notice it is in exactly the same ballpark as are these boats:
New18 info and M4 added
=====================================
FOILER WEIGHT

SA: 88.8sq.ft
Sailing Weight(includes crew): 220lb.
main foil area: 1.19 sq. ft.
Foil Loading(Lbs per sq. ft. at 80% max boat weight with crew):147.89
**W/SA: 2.47lb. per sq.ft.(sail loading)
***SA per sq.ft. of main foil area(a SA/ws ratio shortened to cover planform area of main foil only): 74.62
*SCP/TOTAL WEIGHT=43%
=======================
For ease of comparison foil areas for the next two boats were arrived at by using the same FOIL LOADING as a Moth.
Only upwind SA is considered. Moth crew=154lb.RS crew=160lb.; 18 crew =3X160lb.
=======================
RS600FF
SA: 131 sq. ft.
Sailing Weight(includes crew): 327lb.
Main foil area: 1.76 sq.ft.
Foil Loading: 147.89 lb. per sq.ft.
**W/SA: 2.49 lb. per sq.ft.
***SA per sq. ft. main foil area: 74.43
======================
M4
SA: 107 sq.ft.
Sailing Weight(includes crew): 259
Mainfoil area: 1.4 sq.ft.
Foil Loading: 147.89 lb.
W/SA: 2.42 lb. per sq.ft.
***SA per sq.ft.main foil area: 76.42
========================
New Foiling 18
SA: 354 sq.ft.
Sailing Weight(includes crew): 858lb
Mainfoil area: 4.64 sq.ft.
Foil Loading: 147.89lb. per sq. ft.
**W/SA: 2.41 lb. per sq.ft.
***SA per sq.ft. main foil area: 75.86
*SCP/Total Weight(Bethwaite ratio)
New boat=39%
Old boat= 33%
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Note the different weights of the boats . Then note the Sa/per sq.ft. main foil area-this is a comparison of Sail area to wetted surface when the boat is flying using just the planform area of the main foil for comparison-THEY ARE NEARLY THE SAME FOR ALL THREE BOATS. Note the W/SA is almost identical for all three boats. This means that all three boats will foil at about the same time adjusted for differences in rig efficiency(Moth probably the best) and for hull L/B ratio as a measure of early takeoff potential(Moth by far the best). As I just said there are other factors and details that will marginally affect performance but this clearly shows how close all three boats are in their ability to fly despite the fact that the RS is 2.5 times heavier than a Moth and the 18 is 5.6 times as heavy as a Moth.
What counts is power to weight ratio as a first look. A more detailed look showing a comparison of SA/ws ratios for all three boats reinforces the accuracy of the power to weight ratio.
--------------------
* For those that don't know Bethwaites ratio SCP/TOTAL WEIGHT is calculated as follows:
1) SCP= Righting Moment divided by the distance between the CE and the CLR
2) SCP is then divided by TOTAL WEIGHT(boat plus crew)
3) originally designed to see if a skiff had the power to plane upwind which,according to Bethwaite, it would do with an answer(in %) over 30.
4) Since the Moth is the baseline for all foiler comparisons comparing the Moth ratio with any other foiler is instructive.
5) One of the beauties of SCP/TOTAL WEIGHT is that it comes up with the SAME NUMBER whether calculated in English or Metric units.
-------------------------
** W/SA= TOTAL WEIGHT(boat+crew)in pounds divided by SA in sq.ft. This is a comparison that is very relevant AS A FIRST LOOK at two different foilers. It has the drawback that it ASSUMES that the two boats have the RM to carry the sail they have. It basically describes the weight per sq.ft. of SA which is the sail loading(similar to wing loading). Compare to the Moth ratio.
-------------------------
*** SA per sq.ft. of mainfoil area=The SA divided by the area of of one side of the mainfoil. It is a shortform of a SAIL AREA/WETTED SURFACE ratio which is most applicable to "airplane" foil configurations with the mainfoil carrying 80% of the load. Moth is the baseline.

wind_apparent

05-03-2008, 03:44 PM

nice work doug......

I even printed it off the other thread so that I could look at it while I was drawing, comes in handy.....how much sail area does the M4 have? what did you do to support the mast step? (not shrouds, structuraly)

Doug Lord

05-03-2008, 04:57 PM

M4 SA is in the data above. Keep in mind that the foil area is an estimate based on giving these other boats the same FOIL LOADING as an early Moth.
Still very interesting how close they all are.... The M4 has been inactive for a year or so. Last time I contacted him the designer, Simon Maguire said he was leaving on a round the world trip. His boat is particularly interesting because,as a singlehander ,it comes in between a Moth and an RS600FF.Here is the (neglected) M4 website:
http://www.sailm4.co.uk/
----------------
The JM 4.6 specs(Monnard):
http://www.sebschmidt.ch/portfolio/01192/specs/
----------------
The RF600FF site:
http://www.inqbator.org.uk/Default.aspx?alias=www.inqbator.org.uk/rs600ff
-------------
These boats are all exciting dvelopments in this incredible revolution and have inspired me and,I'm sure,many others! Hope this helps-these are hard sites to find......

Doug Lord

05-04-2008, 04:38 PM

Its not that hard to rig up. On my first boat I designed a worm drive arrangement where you turned a knob to angle the board-I didn't use it because I got in too much of a hurry. I NEEDED IT! Without it it is a real bitch to change the angle of incidence of the foil.Whether you make it so that it can be adjusted on the water or not it is CRITICAL that you have the ability to change the angle of incidence of the main foil! And preferably the rudder foil as well. The more(and easier) adjustments you have the easier it will be to set the boat up initially. The inside of the daggerboard case was bigger (f&A) than the board at the top of the trunk. Its easy to make a fixed system that you have to come into the beach to adjust OR you can take the extra time in building to make it adjustable on the water. On my new boat it will be adjustable on the water-too much hassle the other way-at least for initial set up. Keep in mind that approximately 80% of the all up sailing weight of the boat including crew will be on the pin or other means you use to vertically restrain the board.

wind_apparent

05-04-2008, 09:31 PM

good work Doug, I will be using one, if you find the time to explain the way it works (I understand the idea, more the nuts and bolts of it) that would be awesome......

wind_apparent

06-18-2008, 05:53 PM

so, I ve been doing alot of work on this idea over the last couple of months since I last posted........

SR-71 formula

LOA - 4 meters
Rack Beam- 2 meters max
HullBeam At chines - 38cm min
Hull Beam At Gunnels - 76cm min
Beam At Rack - 2 meters
Trap - yes
One sail Only
11sqm
Max Mast Height - 7m
Max Boom- 2.5m
Max Luff Length - 6.3m
Open Foils (must be centerline mounted)
Min weight - ( hopefully only 5kg more than a moth, hull foils and wings. Haveto see what the proto comes out at and see what is realistic to keep homebuilders on par with boat builders if there ever are any.

Anyway, I am readdressing this because I got redirected here from the yahoo moth group because my posts are not mothy enough:D anyway, thats totally understandable......since last post I have got a quote from CST composites for all my wingbars, have decided on a CST HM 46mm Contender mast (46mm x 6.45 m), going to mount that on a 50cm stump (7m mast height overall). along with that a 2.45m eliptical boom mounted moth style (hinge joint). Been talking to Bill Hansen about a pocket luff sail of 11sm.. the hull drawings are almost done, so I will post them soon......can't wait to take the frame drawings to kinkos so I can get going on my mold. I again welcome any input.

bistros

06-19-2008, 08:34 PM

I've been following your progress and it seems you are taking a similar path to the one I did. My singlehander's hull weighs 85 pounds, painted and varnished. My main is a little bit bigger - I went the 505 size mast route instead of the Contender. I figure it is just under 12 sq.M. I'm currently about 210, so bigger sail doesn't hurt me.

Had the main fully battened square top made by Ethan Bixby at North. Mast is stayed with spreaders, carbon boom and normal controls (vang, outhaul & cunningham). I tried to contact Bill Hansen about eight months ago about the main, but decided to go with Bixby because he knew the 505 geometry better (former world champ).

Since I'm not foiling I've got a 29er kite for fun downwind.

The boat ready to sail weighs in at 130 pounds.

Built mine with cedar strips waterline down, 3mm Okume ply panels above and stringer and frame substructure.

wind_apparent

06-19-2008, 10:10 PM

It's good someone else is interested:D, almost gave it up this week when all the mothies told me this whole idea was nuts, so now I've got to blow them out as well as my local A class guys:p just kidding, they are a very helpful group of fellas.....so anyway, I've recommited myself and hopefully after a couple more intense weekends of drawing it will be build time......cant wait to start making some sawdust on my new bandsaw. The hull drawing itself is basically done, at least I'm pretty sure it is, Just messing around with bulkheads and reinforcements right now... got some things I'm not that sure about, like if I use a stub instead of a mast step like on a moth, is my trapeze going to mess with the mast rotation, and if it is I should go with a regular stayed mast, but I will need to move up to a 7m mast and have to readjust my maststep reinforcment. I am also messing with my wing bars, I was thinking it would be cool to have them be adjustable so I could telescope them as the wind builds, have them adjust from 1.5 to 2m with maybe two points in between, but I don't know that much about telescoping carbon tubing, so I need to talk to the guys down at CST about that now as well....i go back and forth on the rig, I know I want a pocket luff sail, so thats not going to change, I can use that with either a rotating mast or a regular convetional one. I'll probablely end up going back to the original plan of using a Swift solo mast, then I don't have to tie the mast into the wings, and I can change them independantly if I have to. But I still need to find a good system for removable spreaders so I can slide my sail on and then connect the spreaders and trapeze lines.. I wish there was a RS600ff fleet in the US, if anyone out there is a RS guy, I'd love to be able to pick your brains alittle, maybe sneak some pictures out of you;) that and I still need to mess with the foils as well.....time to talk to Thomas Jundt and John Ilett.....back to drawing, i'll post pics soon........

Doug Lord

06-20-2008, 08:44 PM

I'm interested-very interested,can't you tell? What you're doing is fantastic and it will be a great contribution to monofoiler design and construction in the US! Keep us informed-and yourself focused-best of luck!

bistros

06-23-2008, 10:54 AM

It's good someone else is interested:D, almost gave it up this week when all the mothies told me this whole idea was nuts.

You'll get a lot of weird looks and doubt from the club know-it-alls ... I sure did. Ignore them and keep your head relentlessly in the project. The last thing you need is third party generated analysis-paralysis.

From my experience, the more crap and trash talking people do, the less they have actually done themselves. People with real-world build experience realize pretty quickly that anything can be done, and that the biggest impediment to making something work is failure to try, fail and improve.

I've gone from "that guy who is obsessed about building a single hand skiff" to "holy ****, that thing really moves" , and I never would have got here if I listened to the majority of people's advice.

I've taken a Walmart barbecue cover, a mesh bag and made a structured spinnaker launcher tube that works incredibly well. I've take 3mm aluminum plate and make a boom sheeting system that works well (taken two revisions to get it right). I adapted a crappy big box store power boat cover and make a sailboat cover that works as well as a $800 custom cover. I've taken a junked bunch of parts and made a first class combo trailer/dolly.

There are no limits to how you can adapt and create quality parts from unlikely sources. There are also other things best done by people who really know what they are doing. The trick is to know what your own limitations are. Imagination can get you further than a checkbook.

Taking a hard look at the people who have innovated before you is really, really important. I can't thank Bram Dally and the SwiftSolo people enough for their development of systems for single hand skiff sailing. I've shamelessly adapted their ideas to work for me.

On a lot of things, go with your gut feelings and experience. Foiling technology is in it's infancy and there is nothing saying your wild ideas are any less valid than anyone elses.

wind_apparent

06-23-2008, 01:27 PM

thanks Bistros

Spent all weekend drawing, I have the hull drawings done and rendered, just need to do the hull frames and foredeck frame drawings, just finished the drawings for the deck frames, looks really good, I'm posting some as soon as I figure out how:p (learned rhino in 4 weekends, but I can't figure out how to work the internet) anyway, full steam ahead.....can't wait to start building molds, ordered MDF today:D My bewilderment has turned into "can't wait to blow past you"........The swift solo site is awesome, I go there all the time for Ideas as well, I was originally going to build a swift, but then I saw the foiler moth and the RS600ff and new I needed to become part of the foiling craze (little boats with one sail going very fast:D )....Bram is a real insperation...thats what I would like this Formula to turn into....a grass roots homebuild class, like the swift solo and the moth. I plan on e-mailing Bram once I get the proto done to see what needs to be done to make that happen. anyway, pics coming soon.

Doug Lord

06-23-2008, 06:05 PM

I like your thinking-most impressive. Looking forward to the drawings!

wind_apparent

06-23-2008, 06:29 PM

"that guy who is obsessed about building a single hand skiff"

well, my wife says I've got that part down. I spend almost all the time I,m not at work drawing and redrawing on my computer, even till 3am sometimes, I don't even really know why..........but its addictive;)

And thank you doug for the encouragement........

wind_apparent

06-23-2008, 11:46 PM

22722

22723

22724

22725
copyright Samuel Schneider Designs 2008

well guys, here they are, the hull is done.........sorry the rendering isn't that good, but I'm using a version of "RHINO" I'm helping develop for MAC OSX, and the rendering and export features still need to be sorted a little more, maybe by the time I post the pics with the racks, foils, and gantry.....

anyway, the boat is going to have an adjustable rack that gets joined to the kingpost, the kingpost will be what the mast and boom get mounted to and will be part of the rack, not part of the hull, just needed it in the pics so that I knew where to end the foredeck cone. This hull is 4 Meters LOA, It is 38cm wide at the chines, and the hiking deck is 78cm wide, it has long solid Cedar gunnels designed into the hull wings to spread the loads of the rack and the Skipper (when he is traping from the edge and standing on the deck in intermediate conditions.) it is pretty mothlike I know, but since the boat will be in the air more than in the water, it seemed like a good idea to have a hull that was as small as possible. planning on 1/4'' Foam core construction with a carbon skin inside and out, with extra layers of kevlar and 9oz glass on the deck for durability and protection.......it has a wave breaker bow like a formula cat, it looks cool and might help with getting to foiling speed faster in choppy conditions, improved windage, and slightly lighter weight for the same waterline......

Doug Lord

06-24-2008, 06:56 AM

Way to go ,Sam! Looks good.

bistros

06-24-2008, 02:28 PM

<snip>
well guys, here they are, the hull is done.........sorry the rendering isn't that good, but I'm using a version of "RHINO" I'm helping develop for MAC OSX, and the rendering and export features still need to be sorted a little more, maybe by the time I post the pics with the racks, foils, and gantry.....

anyway, the boat is going to have an adjustable rack that gets joined to the kingpost, the kingpost will be what the mast and boom get mounted to and will be part of the rack, not part of the hull, just needed it in the pics so that I knew where to end the foredeck cone. This hull is 4 Meters LOA, It is 38cm wide at the chines, and the hiking deck is 78cm wide, it has long solid Cedar gunnels designed into the hull wings to spread the loads of the rack and the Skipper (when he is traping from the edge and standing on the deck in intermediate conditions.) it is pretty mothlike I know, but since the boat will be in the air more than in the water, it seemed like a good idea to have a hull that was as small as possible. planning on 1/4'' Foam core construction with a carbon skin inside and out, with extra layers of kevlar and 9oz glass on the deck for durability and protection.......it has a wave breaker bow like a formula cat, it looks cool and might help with getting to foiling speed faster in choppy conditions, improved windage, and slightly lighter weight for the same waterline......

Looks like you've really studied the Fastacraft/Moth guys and built upon their progress. Far more of a full-on foiler than I thought. I was expecting something more RS600FF-ish.

I have no doubt you'll get things working, just do not stop moving the ball forward. It's easy to say to yourself to forget things for a day or so and suddenly a month has passed. If you can;t get big jobs done, switch to a little job that you can, just so you keep the feeling of progress. I've found over time that making a little progress every week keeps the project from stagnating. Bet you foil before this time next year!

--
Bill

wind_apparent

06-24-2008, 11:22 PM

Looks like you've really studied the Fastacraft/Moth guys and built upon their progress. Far more of a full-on foiler than I thought. I was expecting something more RS600FF-ish.

spent a lot of time studying moth build photo blogs, skiff build blogs and sites, asking questions to the yahoo moth group, and got a whole list of measurements from John Gilmore (Australian moth builder). I changed them around a bit to fit my formula, threw in a couple of my own ideas, and started to draw. Spent two weeks on paper with battens at the kitchen table, then started putting stuff into the computer. I know the learning curve will be much steeper on a design of this nature, but so will the payoff, I descibe it as "borderline stupid/cutting edge::D ", Besides, once the hull leaves the water, its just a thing causing drag, the sooner you start going fast enough to foil, the sooner waterline beam stops mattering at all (as far as stability is concered). I went for a good compromise, If the RS600ff and Foiler moths are sailable, then I think this will be as well...

(to anyone reading this, I would love any feedback, if you looked at it tell me what you think....)

Doug Lord

06-26-2008, 08:01 PM

Sam I did some work with the SA number you provided:
SA-115 sq.ft.
With a 160lb crew and the identical W/sa of a Moth with Veal onboard:
W/SA=2.558
Target all up including crew:294lb.
Target ready to fly boat weight:134lb.
Mainfoil area:
-to take off at 6.9knots boat speed=1.23 sq.ft.
-to take off at 6 knots boat speed=1.61 sq.ft.
-------------------------------
Rudder foil area is good at 50-60% of mainfoil area-same aspect ratio(7/1 good). You might consider building in a method to add short foil tip extensions
to the mainfoil only for improved light air takeoff. You can take them off for higher speed...
These areas are based on a CL(coeficient of lift) of 1.42 with a 20 degree down flap on a 63412 section. This is outside the drag bucket but would jump into the "bucket" shortly after takeoff.
This formula for lift was from Ray Valenga on foils.org:
S= L divided by[ F X Vsquared X CL]
----------
where S= foil area in sq.ft.
-------------------
L=.8 X [all up boat + crew weight] In other words, mainfoil load is 80% of total weight.
-------------------
F=2.09
-----------------
V squared= speed in MPH squared(divide this by 1.15 for knots)
-----------------
CL=coeficient of lift which I got from Abbot and Doenhoff.

====================================
Note on the wand: you do NOT have to use a bow wand! A wand can be designed to be integral to your board and retract when you lift the board up-without any attachment to the hull whatsoever.Used like this on Rave multifoiler. Very simple...

wind_apparent

06-26-2008, 09:01 PM

bistros

06-27-2008, 06:41 AM

looks good Doug, only thing is if I end up with an all up weight of 137lb I'll throw the whole thing in the dump:( (an A cat weighs about 165, and if you think about it, thats like 2 sr-71's) ..........I want to keep it under 95lb, and closer to 85-90 if I can, 80 is my dream. less then that might be scary......(cst 46mm mast, carbon boom, all cst carbon rack, carbon gantry, foam/carbon hull,) should stay under 100 easy. the boat itself is not that much bigger than a moth, only 65cm longer, about the same freeboard, the rack is actually smaller (but some thicker tubing, so a wash), the boom is going to end up only 10cm longer (Hansen short foot technology) , 1.5m taller mast, 3sqm more sail (a wash since there is no wing tramp), and the shorter but stouter foils will probably be a wash as far as weight. if it ends up 60lb heavier than an average Moth than I did something very wrong:D

try it again with an all up weight of 90lb and a crew weight of 180 (average size trapeze skiff sailor with a harness on, this is a big boy kind of boat, not a toy:D ). (it ends up a 19lb difference or like 14%)

do you have any pics of this Rave foil wand?

Thank you once again for your input and interest.....

*****just got an update for Rhino OSX with better rendering, so real boat drawings with a hiking rack coming soon******

Thoughts:

I think your weight targets are very reasonable - more so if you are vacuum bagging. Keeping resin under control is important.

The things I didn't think of were real-world tuning and failure mode issues on my boat.

1) How do you self recover from a capsize? Water starts possible?
2) How do you carry/swim the boat out to water of enough depth to foil? What do you hang on to?
3) How do you tow/drag the boat? Got places to tie on broken stuff if it breaks?
4) What's going to break when you stuff the bow?
5) What parts are fragile? Consider things happening outside the design plane of strength (many things are strong in only one dimension)
6) Can you reach vang/cunno when trapping?
7) Got a place for a water bottle/hydration? I can easily get dehydrated/winded sailing my boat for a half hour
8) Have you provided for tuning measurement and rig adjustment flexibility? Mast step go enough range? Rig rake got a broad range of adjust?

The issue is that design work is theoretical and the real world sometimes doesn't agree. Bitch is we sail in the real world.

Doug Lord

06-27-2008, 07:01 AM

Bistros raises several good points; one of them is a pet peeve of mine: make your foils retractable. The early Moths were fixed because they were conversions with the daggerboard curved/angled forward and the boats had to be walked out with the foils down.
The Bladerider,M4 and Jundts foiling 18 all use retractable foils.
Don't forget buoyancy pods-like the Bladerider,M4, and Mirabaud.
Go here to "hydrofoil control system animation" for an idea of the Rave system: http://members.aol.com/HYDROSAIL/

wind_apparent

06-27-2008, 09:37 AM

I'll see if I can work through these.....

I think your weight targets are very reasonable - more so if you are vacuum bagging. Keeping resin under control is important.

yup, vac bag, over a skinned mail mold, was going to go female, but thats alot of work for an untested one off piece, maybe on #2

1) How do you self recover from a capsize? Water starts possible?

I'll have a lot of righting lines rigged up the first couple times till i get it sorted, I expect to spend more time in the water than on the boat first bunch of times out.:( It will be impossible to know about waterstarts till I'm in the water.

2) How do you carry/swim the boat out to water of enough depth to foil? What do you hang on to?

Retractable foils, have to have them, alot of times I'll be sailing off of a beach. Carrying a 70 pound moth is one thing, a 90 pound boat something else, especially after sailing all day. the good thing is I plan to have shorter foils than a moth (like on a rs600ff) just to keep from flying to high, crashing from a meter up while on the trap would be painfull.:eek: still figuring out what a good length would be. that and shorter foils don't have to retract so high.

3) How do you tow/drag the boat? Got places to tie on broken stuff if it breaks?

Tow/drag from the bow shackle, or the rack, or the stern. can always tie broken stuff on to the racks with the righting lines (and I'll probably take some rope out with me till I start to trust her a little)

4) What's going to break when you stuff the bow?

Good chance it will be me:D ........................................................not the rack, maybe the kingpin, but I doubt it, if anything the mast will unstep if I snap the proder, there is a chance I mess up the foredeck cone, or rip the rack off the deck itself. Luckily this boat is kind of like a hypermoth, so I took into consideration all the ways I've seen and heard of them failing over the years and designed accordingly. And I plan on overbuilding it a little, I know I could get it down to 85lbs if I wanted to, but my target is 90 just so I can beef up the places that need it. Its a proto, I can always build the next one lighter.

5) What parts are fragile? Consider things happening outside the design plane of strength (many things are strong in only one dimension)

the Proder or spreaders, the gantry and the hull skin in the stern, the rack attachment points (i am running pretty beefy full length solid cedar gunnels to spread the load). The deck itself, (already plan on putting a layer of Kevlar on the underside and a layer of 9oz glass on the top over the carbon skins to beef her up a little).

6) Can you reach vang/cunno when trapping?

I plan on running them out to the trap rack bars like on a moth.

7) Got a place for a water bottle/hydration? I can easily get dehydrated/winded sailing my boat for a half hour

I'm going to Ductape a beer cozy to the rack strut, right next to my Velocitek:p , I hope to stash my water bottle in my gantry, but when I'm out just sailing (not racing because I could get protested) I ware a Camelback hydration pack over my harness.

8) Have you provided for tuning measurement and rig adjustment flexibility? Mast step got enough range? Rig rake got a broad range of adjust?

tuning measurement - yes, mast step - no (don't really have one, if it needs to move I have to cut the kingpin off the rack, it is where it is pretty much).
Rig rake - as much as I want, the mast pivots on the kingpin, I can make it as straight or as raked as I want till I don't have any more room under the boom to tack.

very good questions, some of which I hadn't thought of, thank you.

on a side note, woke up to this in my inbox.......

I'm going to join the course of folks who have encouraged you to stay within an existing class framework. Your going to spend a bunch of time and money building this really cool boat, and nobody's is really going to care. The only person to whom this will be worth anything is you. A moth will still be faster. Sure, the numbers say your boat should be faster, but you've got one shot down the design spiral. Moth foilers have had dozens of clever folks working on improving them for nearly a decade. And suppose you do manage to pull off a brilliant design, how are you going to judge it? Faster than a moth - well damn, it ought to be. Better than an RS600FF? Are you going to go to Europe to find out? You're going to be playing by yourself. Is that what you want?

its nice to feel so loved:rolleyes: blowing it up, framing it, and putting it in my work space. I feel like such a maverick:D

bistros

06-27-2008, 10:28 AM

on a side note, woke up to this in my inbox.......

its nice to feel so loved:rolleyes: blowing it up, framing it, and putting it in my work space. I feel like such a maverick:D

No lack of people willing to pee in your Cornflakes, is there? Join a class where your size will guarantee you will never be competitive!

Like me, it appears you are doing this for yourself, and if anyone wants to join after you are done, great. I will not lose sleep if no one else builds a boat like mine - I did it for me. It appears however that there are lots of people interested in the concept.

In my work world (I'm an open source guy working in communication security) the best apps are the result of someone scratching a personal itch without regard for what someone else may want. Funny thing is that typically, lots of people share the exact same problem and will jump at something that scratches their itch as well.

Committees build highly compromised, bloated and unfocused crap. Focus is the toughest thing to maintain in product development.

Sheep only feel comfortable in large flocks. Be a shepherd, not a sheep!

Bram Dally built a boat because he personally wanted a one man 49er training platform. There was no intention of creating a one design, but look what happened.

It will all be worth it the first instant you lift out of the water. Anything after that split second is gravy.

wind_apparent

06-27-2008, 12:08 PM

No lack of people willing to pee in your Cornflakes, is there? Join a class where your size will guarantee you will never be competitive!

its ok, I wasn't going to eat them anyway, I'm more of a rasinbran kind of guy....besides everyone knows that only 150lb guys like to sail hydrofoils.:D

and an American trapeze hydrofoil class would never catch on, it's to hard and no fun to sail.....like these guys below .............only doing it for the chicks and the money.....

Chris Ostlind

06-27-2008, 01:31 PM

.............only doing it for the chicks and the money.....

Yes, Quite. It's the single most daunting thing my wife has to face with me designing niche product boats at my age.

The thought does have a certain, shall we say, youthfully charged ring to it, though. I kinda like that and it goes miles when worn by my inner 12 year old.

Your project, WA and the on-going work by Bistros with his skiff, are the essence of what makes this whole thing work for me. I very much admire what you are doing to pursue your own section of the far-flung universe.

Chris

Doug Lord

06-27-2008, 07:02 PM

Closeups of Rave foil control head:
http://www.doranoster.com/pdf/Getting%20it%20up%20-%20A%20New%20Rave%20Foil%20Up-Haul%20System2.pdf
More from Doran: what he calls incidence control does the same thing on a Rave that the "Fbox" does on a Moth; it is a method of changing the angle of incidence of the foil(relative to the boat) to improve takeoff ,mid range foiling and high speed foiling.Don't consider using his angle of incidence numbers on your boat IF you are using asymetrical foils(similar to the 64312 section). A monofoiler with an asymetric foil could benefit from approximately -.5 degrees(high speed) to + four degrees(light air takeoff). You MUST be able to adjust this under load. It is not required to start foiling but will greatly enhance your foiling experience. If it is too daunting to consider now leave enough room to add it later.
http://www.doranoster.com/pdf/incidence-controls-020712-hto.pdf

wind_apparent

06-27-2008, 07:28 PM

Yes, Quite. It's the single most daunting thing my wife has to face with me designing niche product boats at my age.

Don't forget all the crazy partys and the free trips to Dubai ;)

The thought does have a certain, shall we say, youthfully charged ring to it, though. I kinda like that and it goes miles when worn by my inner 12 year old.

I'm trying to let my "inner 12" year old hang out with my "married with two kids and a full time job outer 32 year old more", I'm hoping this project will do that:p

wind_apparent

06-27-2008, 08:34 PM

If it is too daunting to consider now leave enough room to add it later.

This first time around I'm just going to worry about getting the foils and the rig working, but keep the other stuff coming, because I want to try some of it on round 2 if I get that far.

bistros

06-27-2008, 10:22 PM

This first time around I'm just going to worry about getting the foils and the rig working, but keep the other stuff coming, because I want to try some of it on round 2 if I get that far.

Good. It is going to get increasingly hard ignoring all the interesting possibilities.

Focus, focus, focus!

Keep things simple, and do _not_ add variables.

Perhaps you may want to consider setting some simple milestones before you get to foiling.

Idea: make a set of basic normal foils and see about sailing the hull to determine sub foiling speed sailing. This can help you a lot in determining tuning, and behavior when you do attempt foiling. It also will give you a chance to work on ergonomics and controls.The boat really needs to work pretty well in this mode or you will never get it up to foiling speed.

Small steps.

wind_apparent

06-28-2008, 12:09 AM

Idea: make a set of basic normal foils and see about sailing the hull to determine sub foiling speed sailing.

Already in the hopper.....First foils without the "T"s, same Cord, just no horizontal foil, I figure maybe a couple months in this trim. or as long as it takes to make real foils:D

The boat really needs to work pretty well in this mode or you will never get it up to foiling speed.

Um.....6 or 7 knots, I have clocked kids in prams doing 10.......but I understand your point.;)

wind_apparent

06-28-2008, 01:07 AM

well, alot of drawing again today. I'm a rack man if you know what I mean:D

so here you go............

Photo 1 - In this close up you can see the adjustable tubes, the outer rack slides into the inner rack, I will be able to adjust it for different wind strengths. Instead of depowering, just more rack.

The rest are self explanatory. The tubes I plan on using are.

53.6mm (1.8mm wall) for the outer wing bars and the wing strut tubes (the ones that get U bolted to the boat).

48.7mm (2.0mm wall) for the extension tubes (the ones that slide into the wing struts), and the kingpin.

25.8mm (1.8mm wall) for the front triangle support tubes.

The rack is 1.8m wide in the pictures, It will extend farther, but in most conditions I plan to use it at this width. I know it looks like its to far out from the boat, but its approximately 45cm from the deck to the rack bar, same as a Musto Skiff, so it should work well.. for when it is farther out than that I am thinking of some sort of buckle on tramp. we'll see how it goes.

yachtyakka

06-28-2008, 02:31 AM

Wind_apparent, how far down the build track are you?

bistros

06-28-2008, 06:50 AM

well, alot of drawing again today. I'm a rack man if you know what I mean:D

so here you go............

Just on visual here are some thoughts:

1) The front looks strong and the kingpost and triangles add a great amount of strength. The rear crossbeam to rack joint looks a little unsupported and possibly weak.

2) The square layout may work well for the rack width adjustability but it doesn't translate to real world well. The trap lines coming from high up on the mast don't automatically increase in length as you move back on the racks, so effectively you will be trapping higher with more pendulum forward as you move back, One of the things Bram did well on the SwiftSolo design was curving the wings to make trapping easier and not require lots of foot loops. Wing width decreases proportionately as you go back, and that makes fighting the pendulum effect easier. Real world this works, as you are typically reaching with the kite up when trapping far aft. In your case, fore/aft trim is more about main foil angle of attack than boat pitch. Foiling adds a new dimension and also limits fore aft movement as you have to keep the boat in the air. I might consider a curved outer tube, or a rack that starts wide forward and narrows aft, making the trapping easier.

3) The wide racks are fine. My Laser 5000 twin wire skiff has monster wide adjustable racks and they work fine and aren't difficult to move on. Some people add "baby bars" halfway out to give a second transitional trapping position and they would make things easier getting out. You don't need a tramp net - or at least I don't think so.

4) It may pay to mock up the layout's critical dimensions in a big garage - outlining the racks in PVC, deck, gunwhales, tiller, kingpost and especially the trap wires. Playing with this beforehand could make a huge difference in sailability. I know it is a lot of work but it is far less than a rebuild once the carbon tube is cut and bonded.

I think the human dynamics and ergonomics of your design are where you really have to get things right up front. You can tweak rigs, you can tweak foils but tweaking a hull or deck/rack layout isn't easy. Foiling and the limitations of mobility (compared to a skiff) to keep the foils working
is a real design consideration. If you watch video of Bora Gulari he really self limits his smooth, controlled movement to stay within a small "box" that allows his Bladerider to work. No wild or big motions are noticeable. Smooth and controlled movement seems to be a foiling key.

Contacting the RS600FF guys may be in order to ask about fore/aft movement requirements and how smooth the tack/gybe to rack trapeze transition needs to be. Just an idea.

HTH,

Bill

Doug Lord

06-28-2008, 08:47 AM

Sam, I used 2.375ID(60mm) with a .093"(2.3mm) wall for my cross(rack) tubes for my boat which had way more SA(182) with the shrouds attached to the forward tubes. I'd say yours were probably big enough but just barely.
Mine were sized for the loads of a 250lb crew jumping as well as for the shroud loads unreinforced.
-------------
Here are some wing bar specs for the new Moth Velociraptor:
http://www.velociraptor-moth.com/shop/page/3?shop_param=
--------
More:
http://home.arcor.de/internationalmoth/int-moth-Dateien/page0005.htm

yachtyakka

06-28-2008, 09:17 AM

Hi Doug, have you got a higher res image of the yacht?

wind_apparent

06-28-2008, 10:22 AM

Wind_apparent, how far down the build track are you?

I've got about 2 months of drawing and research in, and I've ordered foam for the hull and MFD for the mold frames. I have also talked to all the suppliers I'm going to use and got estimates.

1) The front looks strong and the kingpost and triangles add a great amount of strength. The rear crossbeam to rack joint looks a little unsupported and possibly weak.

The rear bar is unsupported , but pretty stout tube, it only has to support the skipper weight and not rig load, it should be fine, its actually like 30cm shorter per side than a moth, which also uses an unsupported rear bar, never seen problems with that.......If anything I can put a crossbeam in after checking the flex.

2) The square layout may work well for the rack width adjustability but it doesn't translate to real world well. Foiling adds a new dimension and also limits fore aft movement as you have to keep the boat in the air.

after studying the RS600ff vids on you tube, and just asking questions to foilers, I have found that you hardly ever go very far forward, and "never" use the aft section of the rack, in the "real word" foilers stay in a very small area in the middle of the rack a majority of the time. for me it will be baby steps forward and baby steps back, so I plan on just optimizing my Trapeze length for that area.

3) The wide racks are fine. You don't need a tramp net - or at least I don't think so.

I don't think so either, I would really like to not use them because I would like to use the gunnel as an intermediate trap rail, and tramps would be in the way of that.

4) It may pay to mock up the layout's critical dimensions in a big garage

plywood, 2x4s, 2" PVC, and closet poles (its what I had laying around in the shed) I spent every night this week messing with that , then took 30 minutes to draw my rack last night.

I think the human dynamics and ergonomics of your design are where you really have to get things right up front. If you watch video of Bora Gulari he really self limits his smooth, controlled movement to stay within a small "box" that allows his Bladerider to work.

I watch the Sam Pascoe RS600ff vid like 12 times a day, just to study and get ideas, after the first couple tiny little steps to initiate foiling he never moves his feet till its time to tack. It seems like its all little upper body movements that keep the whole thing balanced, I could probably get away with having a 2' long rack bar;) (I would save a ton on carbon)

Contacting the RS600FF guys may be in order to ask about fore/aft movement requirements and how smooth the tack/gybe to rack trapeze transition needs to be.

True, if there are any of you out there, pm me:p

thank you again, very helpful stuff..........

wind_apparent

06-28-2008, 11:31 AM

Sam, I used 2.375ID(60mm) with a .093"(2.3mm) wall for my cross(rack) tubes for my boat which had way more SA(182) with the shrouds attached to the forward tubes. I'd say yours were probably big enough but just barely.

keep in mind that the big crossbars (53.6mm OD) have a fairly nice length of 48.7mm OD tube running through them as well (essentially 3.8mm wall combined). My shrouds are going to be attached to the crossbars where the kingpin triangle frame meets it.

thanks for the input and Veloceraptor links...

bistros

06-28-2008, 06:44 PM

I used the Imron because of faster cure time and the eventual hardness it reaches. Imron doesn't use reducer like most paints for spray application - just their own hardener.

Some folks I really respect at Phil's Foils swear by it for finish paint.

Imron is pretty evil in terms of the chemical content. You've got to have a positive pressure air system, paint booth and a good mask as well as 100% skin coverage. I didn't go near it during painting - a lot of automotive painters won't use it, even though it produces unquestionably good results.

Eric painted the boat in his paint booth using a good spray gun and compressor.

I'm very happy with the finish. No detectable orange peel and no runs.

Fairing compound? West System. I kind of have a bad memory of this as you put it on and remove 99% of it sanding, but you have to do it. After fairing and sanding we used a fair amount of Awlgrip primer to build it up again for wet sanding at 220, then 400. There were two colors of Awlgrip primer used - first grey and then white to help gauge final sanding. Almost all of the white was sanded off, and it provided a very visible indication of surface problems - you could see sanding scratches easily because of the white on grey. After sanding there was a final finishing filler pass which was used to fill any remaining problems, re-sanding at 600 wet and then the final Imron.

Eric is really good at this - I learned a lot. Eric spent a couple weeks interning with Larry Tuttle of Waterrat fame this year learning about finishing technique.If you don't know who Larry is, ask a 505 guy.

wind_apparent

06-28-2008, 07:25 PM

After sanding there was a final finishing filler pass which was used to fill any remaining problems

What did you use for this?

bistros

06-28-2008, 08:57 PM

What did you use for this?

Even after the 400 wet pass sanding down the white primer to mostly grey, it was very visually apparent when there were sanding scratches and voids. The primer did not fill everything in completely, so a very fine filler was ghosted over these areas, which were then brought up to surface level. This filler was something I had never seen before - Eric indicated that high end automotive painters and perfectionists like Larry did this to assure their finished surfaces were fair and flat. From the results it really works.

The final 600 wet rendered a very nice surface for the Imron, and probably had a lot to do with how well the paint spread and settled flat. Although it is paint on epoxy/glass over wood it looks like a Mercedes car quality finish.

I'll ask Eric what exactly the product was at this stage. It was in a squeeze tube and was a very fine paste filler. We used a soft plastic scraper for application.

--
Bill

wind_apparent

06-29-2008, 08:56 PM

so, I spent another Sunday on the computer, I cant wait to start getting my hands dirty. today it was all about mold design. Got some frame sheets done for my deck mold and pretty far into my hull mold (just have to draw a stucture for my frames to go on).

Heres the pics.......

( I cant believe I got all those frames on to one 4x8 sheet)

Chris Ostlind

06-29-2008, 09:51 PM

( I cant believe I got all those frames on to one 4x8 sheet)

I hope you are cutting those on a CNC setup and that you left the correct spacing for the tool pass.

I know this from having a very understanding software guy at the CNC shop 6 years ago who took the time to reconfig my original nest so that it would work when I started to put the thing together.

Chris

wind_apparent

06-30-2008, 12:44 AM

I hope you are cutting those on a CNC setup and that you left the correct spacing for the tool pass.

I was going to do it the old school way, Kinko's and a saw, (I've seen many boats done this way, Swift solo, half the worlds moths, International Canoes,) they all seem to still get through the water alright:D I know CnC is more accurate and faster, and now that I think about it probably more cost effective. So on second thought I might have to make some calls tomorrow. If I did go Cnc and had to change the drawings it would not be hard, all the frames are "joined" objects, so I can just drag them around at will, would take about 10 minutes. Just for kicks, what is a good frame spacing? and what kind of file do I need to convert to?

Thanks

Chris Ostlind

06-30-2008, 09:25 AM

The typical cutting tool is 1/2" in diameter minimum for this type of operation.

They should be able to accept .dwg, .dxf files for conversion to their machine software with no problem. The trick is making sure that all the curves are joined and that there are no breaks for the cut path.

If you send them the file before you show-up with the stock to be cut, you probably will not be there more than 1 hour total.

Smallish cabinet shops with full sheet CNC tables will be the most cost effective, with the bigger shops having the fastest feed rate machines. It's really good if you find a shop where the machine operator or the shop owner are boat nuts (of any kind) I've had my best experiences with that type of setup.

Also doesn't hurt to supply them with some CAD images of the project as it will tulook when completed. Most of these guys are cutting Melamine laminated particle board all day, so when someone shows-up who is making a carbon flying machine, they will get special attention.

The guys who cut my parts have renderings of my boats hanging on the wall next to the control station and a couple of them have dropped by to see how it all is going together. It makes for a fun project for everyone.

Chris

bistros

06-30-2008, 10:47 AM

I was going to do it the old school way, Kinko's and a saw, (I've seen many boats done this way, Swift solo, half the worlds moths, International Canoes,) they all seem to still get through the water alright:D I know CnC is more accurate and faster, and now that I think about it probably more cost effective. So on second thought I might have to make some calls tomorrow. If I did go Cnc and had to change the drawings it would not be hard, all the frames are "joined" objects, so I can just drag them around at will, would take about 10 minutes. Just for kicks, what is a good frame spacing? and what kind of file do I need to convert to?

Thanks

It cost me around $230 to get all my (14) station molds (1/2 exterior plywood), all panels and bulkheads (3mm Okume) cut on a CNC table. When you look a the cost of your time it's a no-brainer to go this route. Nice part of the CNC process is you can mark up some registration points/holes in the CAD files and use them to help visually aligning the stations on the strongback. It's easier to trust than manual cutting. We had stringer cut outs on the stations we used for checking alignment. We also included a horizontal extension below the station that attached to the strongback. This station extension made a great frame of reference point for lining things up, as well as a good clamping point during initial setup of the stations. Once things were lined up we screwed the stations to the strongback..

The panels were "wet out" and cured with epoxy before cutting on the CNC table to help prevent edge tearing and save time later during assembly. We only had to wet out the edges after cutting.

In your case with the male plug you might want to consider wetting out the inside of the frames just to keep the moisture out of the finished plug. Not that it will be an issue for the first hull, but over time the plug may not be stable if you seal the outside surface and leave the inside to breath and absorb water. This idea may or may not have merit. Just a thought.

--
Bill

wind_apparent

06-30-2008, 08:58 PM

Chris Ostlind

06-30-2008, 09:05 PM

So many coats of release agent that your head swims three coats ago.

It is absolutely astounding how the most tiny of little air dents in the surface will manage to hold your part when you try to make a clean pull.

Take the kids out of the room when you pull the first part. Daddy may turn ugly.... ;-)

Chris

wind_apparent

06-30-2008, 10:17 PM

So many coats of release agent that your head swims three coats ago.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot.......I am making a male mold from 3/8'' Mdf, covered with a 1/4'' ply skin, microlight filler, then 9oz glass, more mircrolight, then sprayed with sandable primer. Buff a little, than"so many coats of release agent that my head swims three coats ago",then vac bag to it :D

bistros

06-30-2008, 10:35 PM

so, talked to a friend who manages a wood shop (the one selling me the MDF and plywood), he doesn't have a Cnc, but has a good friend who has a nice machine in his spindle shop, 4x8 table, so I need to go talk to them when I have my drawings finalized. (yet one more reason to stay focused and get them done)

This is a good idea, I will look into it, talk to the Cnc tech and see what he thinks.

I live in colorado so moisture isn't a problem, but if I move and I'm still using this mold I'll think about spraying the inside with a couple coats of marine varnish.

thanks for the pointers, keep em comin...

****background info****** I am making a male mold from 3/8'' Mdf, covered with a 1/4'' ply skin, microlight filler, then 9oz glass, more mircrolight, then sprayed with sandable primer. Buff a little then vac bag to it. sound good:?:

Sounds good. About the wet out of the panels - it really helps, because if you have routed manually you know it works well in only one direction - if you move the router in the wrong direction you can get pretty bad grabs & tearouts. In a CNC table the router is fixed, but the material you are working on is still subject to the same forces. Epoxying the surface before routing reduces problems dramatically, as the surface grain is stabilized quite a bit. I'm sure there may be greater bit wear, but what does a 1/2 straight bit cost?

As well when talking to the CNC people find out clearly about how they hold down the material. Many use vacuum tables, but if they aren't high tech, make sure you know where they will be clamping/screwing down so you don't put a part where you don't want it ventilated or smooshed. I'd be a little skeptical about vacuum tables as well - you just can't afford to lose registration of your datum once the cutting starts.

wind_apparent

06-30-2008, 11:48 PM

Epoxying the surface before routing reduces problems dramatically, as the surface grain is stabilized quite a bit

I have worked quite a bit with mdf, no grain related tare out, because there is no grain, but I will wet out the 14'' plywood, thanks for the tip.

As well when talking to the CNC people find out clearly about how they hold down the material. Many use vacuum tables,

The guy today said that they have a vac table, I'll be sure to make it a point that accuracy is very important.

Tonights side note......New bow lines.

Thanks to Bruce Mcleod (respected Aussie moth builder)for pointing out the fact that my boat would tack better if I rounded the tip of the bow a little, so I did:rolleyes: Now I need to change it on all the drawings and change the bow mold frames. (I'll do that tomorrow night). anyway.........

Pic 1 - Old pointy bow, Pic 2 - new rounded bow (it looks better in Higher res pics)

wind_apparent

07-15-2008, 01:31 AM

Well, its been a week or so, alot of works been going on, I drew up a guestimated rig (the mast and boom are the right length, and the bend is about right). Have all the hull mold stanchions, the nose cone mold stanchions, and the deck stanchion plans all drawn up and ready to take to the cnc, of course I have to leave town for a couple of weeks so it'll have to be on hold for a while, but its coming along very nicely, I don't want to go to fast anyway, because there is no way I'm going to beat winter, so steady as she goes. now for the fun part, Foil design, looks like its time to go back to school:rolleyes: (not very much info out there about homebuilt foils, not like there is about hulls)

(If anyone out there has any pictures or info, it would be greatly appriciated)

I'm thinking double feeler wands mounted on the crossbar like a couple of the mothies and mirabaud are using, same feel on both tacks, I would also like to use a flapless rudder like the bladerider, but not really sure how that system works.

like I said, time to go to school, I would be happy to just get the vertical for the main foil going, so that I can make the case to put in the hull.

anyway, the latest Rhino osx update lets me do things like this.......(ah the joys of high res quality pics)

******its a quick sketch, need more mast bend, haveto put the spreaders and the prodder in the right place, I know I know......its just so I could get an idea******

bistros

07-17-2008, 10:02 AM

Sam:

There was some great needles to be found in a ridiculously large haystack thread on Sailing Anarchy / Dinghy Anarchy regarding wand placement. Our good friend Doug Lord was expounding on the horrors of bow mounted wands, and quite a few experienced foilers (people that actually sail full size boats) presented strong arguments to the contrary. It may be worth a read, as some of the logic regarding timing of flap induced lift adjustments at speed made sense.

In a manually controlled system anticipation of lift requirement is the operator's responsibility, as as he can see what's coming at him. In an automated system, the system has to be located enough distance forward of the main lifting foil to allow for system hysteresis so the lift change arrives in time to respond to the actual change in the surface condition.

The hypothesis was that if the wand and the foil were at the same place lengthwise on the boat, lift changes would be happening after the surface condition requiring the change had passed by. The control rods & bell crank added a small but measurable lag to the system.

I know that this comment will probably cause a torrent of rebuttal (I can already hear "pitch coupling"), but at the end of the day I would do your own research and form your own opinions. Bladerider and Prowler both implement bow wands for reasons that seem to be justified to them. Andrew McDougall and John Illett aren't exactly people that should be ignored.

Cheers,

--
Bill

BTW, the sketch looks cool. It is always nice to get a vision in your head of where you are going.

wind_apparent

07-17-2008, 01:23 PM

Sam:
[QUOTE]Our good friend Doug Lord was expounding on the horrors of bow mounted wands, and quite a few experienced foilers (people that actually sail full size boats) presented strong arguments to the contrary

I was just reading on this thread yesterday, it made some very good points, so much so that I was thinking of going back to a bow mounted system:D and as my own little twist I was thinking maybe a wand on each side for symetrical feel and response on each tack. maybe 2/3 up to the bow from the foil(still give the systme time to react and also take some of the slop out of a longer system.) I have also found a wealth of knowledge on the subject as I started to really hunt for stuff, Chris Miller has put a lot out there, and I have been receiving all kinds of great stuff to my inbox.....(including some full size foil files for Rhino) thanks bruce;)

so its coming along.

BTW, the sketch looks cool. It is always nice to get a vision in your head of where you are going.

Can't wait to get back to it and get it closer to right. The weekend is coming.
after looking at the layout and getting some information from Rs600ff sailers about flying gibes and tacks, an end-boom sheeting system may be in order (getting the sheet out of the way lets you stay forward in the boat instead of shifting your weight back and causing extra drag, a no no while foiling)

bistros

07-17-2008, 03:01 PM

I was just reading on this thread yesterday, it made some very good points, so much so that I was thinking of going back to a bow mounted system:D and as my own little twist I was thinking maybe a wand on each side for symetrical feel and response on each tack. maybe 2/3 up to the bow from the foil(still give the systme time to react and also take some of the slop out of a longer system.) I have also found a wealth of knowledge on the subject as I started to really hunt for stuff, Chris Miller has put a wealth of knowledge out there, and I have been receiving all kinds of great stuff to my inbox.....(including some full size foil files for Rhino) thanks bruce;)

so its coming along.

Can't wait to get back to it and get it closer to right. The weekend is coming.
after looking at the layout and getting some information from Rs600ff sailers about flying gibes and tacks, a end-boom sheeting system may be in order (getting the sheet out of the way lets you stay forward in the boat instead of shifting your weight back and causing extra drag, a no no while foiling)

Hmm ... from an idealistic point of view if you are sailing the boat flat, there should be no need for dual wands. I do however realize that the world is far from ideal. Personally, I fail to meet ideal in many ways (which my wife would be happy to elucidate), so as a helm I deviate from flat far too much.

I chose to go with the end boom split bridle, and boom sheeting for a bunch of reasons, speed of tacks and gybes being one of the major ones. I just hate tripping over crap when running across. Since you are foiling, you'll be a lot more sensitive to fore/aft weight shifts where being out of place could blow a foiling gybe or tack.

I also ran the mainsheet inside the boom from the aft block end to the gooseneck, turning it there on a block and running it back to the rachet and boom mounted cleats. This took the dangling sheet away as well and contributed to better mobility without getting hung up.

The other major benefit of the boom end split bridle and 1:1 sheeting is that there is far less mainsheet in the boat, and far better responsiveness to control movements. I can go from fully extended to centerline in one arm pull without using my teeth and two hands. Big necessity for a singlehander. The long lever arm of the full boom length has the same kind of effective purchase as a multi block mainsheet setup. You do have to get used to sensitive movements - i.e. six inches of accidental sheet release can cause a swim.

wind_apparent

07-17-2008, 04:01 PM

Hmm ... from an idealistic point of view if you are sailing the boat flat, there should be no need for dual wands. I do however realize that the world is far from ideal. Personally, I fail to meet ideal in many ways (which my wife would be happy to elucidate), so as a helm I deviate from flat far too much.

There is this crazy idea in foiling called "veal heal" where you sail the boat as much as 15deg to windward when up on the foils, that being said, Dual wands might be nice because it would add simitry. might not be needed, but might work out well? Might not be worth the drag, still thinking about it.

as far as end boom sheeting, got any pics?

thanks again.

bistros

07-17-2008, 04:50 PM

There is this crazy idea in foiling called "veal heal" where you sail the boat as much as 15deg to windward when up on the foils, that being said, Dual wands might be nice because it would add simitry. might not be needed, but might work out well? Might not be worth the drag, still thinking about it.

as far as end boom sheeting, got any pics?

thanks again.

I'll take some better pictures and post them. This one shows the split bridle and the entry into the boom tube. There is a Harken block at both ends of the boom, with the lower part of the boom cut away to allow the blocks. The rear block is mounted to the boom and the forward block is attached to the mast luff track.

The forward block turns the rope 180 and it goes back to the rachet block underneath the boom. The vang strap leaves a space where the sheet passes through. The split bridle legs meet right at the block when the boom is at centerline.

The rachet block at the boom has a clam cleat on a plate on either side, as with the spinnaker I need to cleat and drop the main. In your case a cleating system would not be necessary (and maybe dangerous).

(And yes, I've retensioned the battens to eliminate the creases)

Regarding the Veal Heel - yeah, I forgot about it. If the wand is on centerline it isn't relevent, except the disturbance wake of the wand tip may cause issues with the leading edge of the foil. I'm not sold on this completely, as I think there would be enough leeway to make the wake not hit the foil leading edge (but that's just a shot in the dark guess). I could imagine the linkage could get complex on a dual wand system. Complexity is the enemy, but if it can't be avoided, so be it.

Doug Lord

07-17-2008, 06:20 PM

Sam:

In an automated system, the system has to be located enough distance forward of the main lifting foil to allow for system hysteresis so the lift change arrives in time to respond to the actual change in the surface condition.

The hypothesis was that if the wand and the foil were at the same place lengthwise on the boat, lift changes would be happening after the surface condition requiring the change had passed by.
---------------------------
WA, this is absolute BS. It's very easy to prove as well: Look at the speed of the boat and the distance it moves every second. Keep in mind that the wand hits the water 3-4' ahead of the main foil:
--boat speed 5 knots=8.43 ft.per second
--boat speed 7 knots=11.8 ft. per second
--boat speed 10 knots=16.86 ft. per second
As you can see there is absolutely no"anticipation of lift"! In other words there is NO advantage to a bow wand "so the lift change arrives in time to respond to the actual change in the surface condition." Lift changes ARE ALREADY happening after the surface condition requiring the change has
passed by!
Further, my main point was that it makes NO DIFFERENCE to altitude control -for the most part-where the wand is-since it is a mechanical averaging system. I say for the most part because there is some evidence that there can be a coupling between the pitching of the boat and unwanted wand movement for a bow mounted wand.
The advantage of a midship wand is that it can be integral to the top of the daggerboard-requiring no cable etc. and therefore be lighter.
I made the point that I believe will prove to be accurate as time goes by: a manual system would eliminate the rapid wand(flap) movement associated with a wand, be lighter still and therefore have less drag. For racing this may be the best way to go-time will tell.
----------------------
Probably your MOST IMPORTANT consideration now is where you are going to put the daggerboard because that will have the most dramatic effect on pitch stability. Take a look at Jundts early AET video and then at his most recent Mirabaud video-you'll see a dramatic improvement in pitch stability.
-
Your sketch looks great. Have you been able to contact Thomas? Let me know...
===========

wind_apparent

07-17-2008, 06:34 PM

If the wand is on centerline it isn't relevent, except the disturbance wake of the wand tip may cause issues with the leading edge of the foil. I'm not sold on this completely, as I think there would be enough leeway to make the wake not hit the foil leading edge (but that's just a shot in the dark guess). I could imagine the linkage could get complex on a dual wand system. Complexity is the enemy, but if it can't be avoided, so be it.
Attached Thumbnails

I have been taking that "complex linkage" thing to heart, and after thinking about my wand system all day, I think it would be best to just go with a bow mount, its hard enough to get the systems sorted without making them difficult. I can always mess with it later. Its best to go with conventional things that work, then try to improve them. really I just want to get the thing up in the air, then I'll worry about being "trick":D I was thinking of putting the wand out in front of the bow on a little rig of its own to keep with simitry, and so that the wake at least hits the leading edge consistantly. still thinking about it. I really like the way your sheeting system works, right along the lines of what I want, can't wait to see more pics. (that and I just love the way your boat looks) while your out there with your camera would you mind clicking a couple pics of your Trapeze System as well?

wind_apparent

07-17-2008, 09:59 PM

The advantage of a midship wand is that it can be integral to the top of the daggerboard-requiring no cable etc.

never really thought about that, I was just going to have a really short linkage on my midships wands, but I already have ideas of ways to do it....more to think about.:?: It will probably come down to doing a couple or of different control systems and then trying them out, go back and forth right now as I think about it more and more and as I gather more info and insight. good thing is, as long as I don't hardwire my boat for any one of them I can try them all.:D

Probably your MOST IMPORTANT consideration now is where you are going to put the daggerboard because that will have the most dramatic effect on pitch stability. Take a look at Jundts early AET video and then at his most recent Mirabaud video-you'll see a dramatic improvement in pitch stability.

I plan on putting the vertical through the deck between my crossbar and my kingpin, have to change my rack build a little, but I can actually use this to my advantage by using it as an excuse to put in one more anchor point on my kingpin. (stronger = better;) ) Then have the vertical angled about 7deg forward to help with ventilation. that should put my forward foil right under and behind where my mast is. (tentitive) Unfortunately that will make a retractable foil improbable because of the boomvang, but oh well ( I do have thoughts of a clip on vang that I could clip onto the boom after lowering the foil, but I'll worry about that later. I recieved information today about the bladerider flapless foil, so I want to use that Nylon wormdrive pin system for my rudder. ( a friend turned that Mirabaud video into a screen saver for me)

Your sketch looks great. Have you been able to contact Thomas?

I'm going at the sketch again tomorrow, I've been looking at it all week letting the rig evolve in my mind, its not that far off. a little more mast bend , round the foot, and lower the boom in the stern some because I'm not going to be back there on the tacks anyway. Haven't contacted Thomas yet because I want to have my brain wrapped around what I'm talking about before I get in over my head with someone already seeped in this stuff.

Doug Lord

07-18-2008, 06:52 AM

Keep in mind that the original reason John angled his board was to get the mainfoil further forward -nothing to do with ventilation(popular myth). If you can't retract your board you will be unhappy.....
Consider the 49er type vang that comes down from on TOP of the boom-makes a lot of room.

bistros

07-18-2008, 06:57 AM

I have been taking that "complex linkage" thing to heart, and after thinking about my wand system all day, I think it would be best to just go with a bow mount, its hard enough to get the systems sorted without making them difficult. I can always mess with it later. Its best to go with conventional things that work, then try to improve them. really I just want to get the thing up in the air, then I'll worry about being "trick":D I was thinking of putting the wand out in front of the bow on a little rig of its own to keep with simitry, and so that the wake at least hits the leading edge consistantly. still thinking about it. I really like the way your sheeting system works, right along the lines of what I want, can't wait to see more pics. (that and I just love the way your boat looks) while your out there with your camera would you mind clicking a couple picks of your Trapeze System as well?

I'm a big fan of sticking to things that have been proven to work - it just takes some tough variables off the table. I would not want to be the proving ground for theories considered and rejected by the most successful platforms out there like Bladerider and Prowler. You've got enough on your plate to resolve without adding more question marks.

It is amazing how much time I've spent sorting out trivial stuff on my boat, and it has got a lot less technology risk than yours.

I'll get some pictures of the trap setup as well. Nothing exotic there at all - typical I-14 style setup. Placement fore and aft of the retainer bungee has been an issue for me - do I optimize for upwind tacking or place it further aft for gybe speed? I would not want to have to move weight forward on a gybe too much and cause a slow down and rig loading, but I also don't want the trap retainer in the way of upwind tacking. Every little detail is a debate and compromise.

Tiller extensions and how to keep them from dragging has been a debate. The split bridle somewhat handles a lot of this, but I tried a couple different methods of using bungee to keep them from dragging and they didn't work well. The SwiftSolo style bungee on tiller wasn't effective at all - it didn't prevent dragging and actually exasperated problems in recovering the extension on tacking. A 29er-X style bungee added a hell of a lot of friction to the steering - nice if you don't want to turn! The 29er-X style was strong enough to cause the leeward extension to drag quite hard laterally - keeping it from dragging back but not helping at all. I'm currently using nothing, and working from the principle that the split bridle bounces the windward extension forward automatically when it tensions. The leeward extension now drags straight back and doesn't add lateral drag.

Rig setup and tuning is a big gray area. We originally set up the rig with turnbuckles on the shrouds for simplicity, and manually tensioned the rig on the forestay. This isn't optimal. There is no repeatability or consistency as I don't like leaving the rig under tension.

I'm buying a Loos gauge to measure things. We've added lowers (really needed), and I'm changing the turnbuckles to 29er-style multi-hole chainplates. I'll probably make a built-in boatbreaker-style tensioning system on the forestay to set up rig tension as well. Probably have to add the same style chainplates to the lowers as well. This rig really responds to and requires tuning. I would guess yours will be similar.

Since you are starting a completely new platform here, to reiterate, complexity is the enemy and I would stick to as much proven systems as possible. I can guarantee that there will be plenty of issues sorting out things without adding huge question marks to the equation. You will find out quickly what systems need more sophisticated methods and what things work well enough without.

bistros

07-18-2008, 08:14 AM

WA, this is absolute BS. It's very easy to prove as well: Look at the speed of the boat and the distance it moves every second. Keep in mind that the wand hits the water 3-4' ahead of the main foil:
--boat speed 5 knots=8.43 ft.per second
--boat speed 7 knots=11.8 ft. per second
--boat speed 10 knots=16.86 ft. per second

In true Doug Lord fashion you have done half the work and reached a firm conclusion - "absolute BS" - without experimentation, measurement, testing, a data set, analysis and conclusions. It is wonderful that you may be able convert knots to feet per second - a good challenge for a fourth grader using Google. You may have forgotten to determine the reaction time of the wand controls to see how it affects the wand placement. As I've said before, your science & engineering skills and objectivity are lacking. If the wand system hysteresis is 500 milliseconds, your feet per second speeds certainly seem to allow changes in time for reaction to conditions happening in a timely fashion.

Doug, the issue I have is that some of your adopted theories from other people's ideas may have merit, and some may not. Without scientific experimentation, measurement and repeatability they are just theories. Scholars publish their thesis and put them up for peer review - the publishing process allows other experts to review and comment on the work done. If the work passes muster, the review process adds credibility tothe body of work, and allows others to build upon it.

You confuse anecdotal and potentially biased third party reports on the Internet with academic works, and reach conclusions skipping the whole annoying "work" part of science. The worst part is you selectively choose the third party Internet posts that re-inforce your pre-decided conclusion, ignoring or deriding those that oppose. I'm certain this call for you to think about how you conclude things will be ignored and held in contempt.

As you can see there is absolutely no"anticipation of lift"! In other words there is NO advantage to a bow wand "so the lift change arrives in time to respond to the actual change in the surface condition." Lift changes ARE ALREADY happening after the surface condition requiring the change has passed by!

Nobody can "see" anything here. You may be able to envision things in your head, but that is not the real world. Measurement of the wand position, measurement of the foil height, flap angle, depth of foil, wave state pooled together would give a data set that could be used to reach some theories regarding the efficacy of various wand systems. Any other method is more voodoo than science. You can't just throw **** at the wall and reach conclusions based on what sticks and what falls off.

I'm not doubting that there may be lots of room for improvement in how things are handled. I think there may be merit in investigating a lot of the ideas brought forth over the past two years - including Mr. Jundt's.

Probably your MOST IMPORTANT consideration now is where you are going to put the daggerboard because that will have the most dramatic effect on pitch stability. Take a look at Jundts early AET video and then at his most recent Mirabaud video-you'll see a dramatic improvement in pitch stability.
-
Your sketch looks great. Have you been able to contact Thomas? Let me know...
===========

Doug, the most important consideration here is getting a working foiler on the water, not daggerboard placement for pitch stability. Stop confusing your personal pet theories with someone else's project goals.

I know this post will probably generate a torrent of continued abuse, capitalized letter shouting and red text, accompanied by other people's photographs and Internet blog posts as evidence of your conclusions. I'd like to politely ask you skip it, as I've seen all your tripe before, as has everyone else. Show me your academic credentials, your professional engineer accreditation, your published papers, your raw data and your experimentation plans. Show me peer reviews, show me repeatability.

The funny thing is, I think some of your seat-of-the-pants anecdotal experience and shade tree mechanics may have merit. I just think you need to step up academically and prove things yourself. Welcome to peer review.

wind_apparent

07-18-2008, 11:51 AM

I'm not doubting that there may be lots of room for improvement in how things are handled. I think there may be merit in investigating a lot of the ideas brought forth over the past two years - including Mr. Jundt's.

I'm using a single bow wand and linkage, thats that, not even going to think about it anymore until I run out of important stuff to mess with.;)

the most important consideration here is getting a working foiler on the water.

Amen.....

I know this post will probably generate a torrent of continued abuse, capitalized letter shouting and red text, accompanied by other people's photographs and Internet blog posts as evidence of your conclusions. I'd like to politely ask you skip it,

I would also like to ask you to skip it, there are about 4 other "foiler wand placement" pissing contests going on at other forums, take your beefs there.

I will be using the current single wand bow linkage system, end of story, I will be putting 7deg of angle on my vertical, end of story, flapless rudder control, end of story.

Foil controls and shapes have now been sorted, moving on to cool rigging, sail, and control ideas (tiller, trap set, prodder, spreaders, stay adjusters, outhaul, downhaul, vang, main sheet, gantry,ect.)

Time to draw......:D

Doug Lord

07-18-2008, 06:31 PM

Are you eliminating retractable main and rudder foils?

-------------------
From the aardvark site(axiom moth)"
Moth Hydrofoil Daggerboard with Flap
Carbon fibre Moth daggerboard with trailing edge flap. NACA 66014 vertical section with 7 degrees forward rake for increased foil seperation. Large chord flap for increased control. H105 lifting section section
Product Details
Price: 850.00 GBP

kprice

07-19-2008, 04:59 PM

At the top of the thread you mentioned retractable foils.

One thing that the big Swiss foiler (Mirabaud project) did to enable retractable foils was to move the front foil in front of the mast. Otherwise the retracted main foil interfers with the boom as you are launching, leading to capsize or worse.

It would mean a bigger side load on the rear vertical foil while in float mode, but it could be worth it to make beach-launch easier. With a semi-balanced rudder design ( i.e. hinge line at about 25% of the area) the tiller loads could be tolerable.

Another feature of the Swiss foiler is that it seems they have wands on both the front and rear foils. Look closely in the photos and I think you can see wands at the back of the boat as well as the front.

Kudos for carrying this project so far.

KP

wind_apparent

07-19-2008, 05:42 PM

One thing that the big Swiss foiler (Mirabaud project) did to enable retractable foils was to move the front foil in front of the mast. Otherwise the retracted main foil interfers with the boom as you are launching, leading to capsize or worse

I'm pretty sure that had more to do with "shared lift" then retractable foils. and on my design thats not really a consideration , at least not on this version.. I do want retractable foils, but I'll be happy to retract them just to the boom and no higher, having 35-40cm of foil sticking out of the bottom of the boat is still better then having 100cm.

It would mean a bigger side load on the rear vertical foil while in float mode, but it could be worth it to make beach-launch easier. With a semi-balanced rudder design ( i.e. hinge line at about 25% of the area) the tiller loads could be tolerable.

As far as rudder, I would have that just slide up and down vertically in some kind of housing, same as the main foil. have some drawings of it somewhere already.

Another feature of the Swiss foiler is that it seems they have wands on both the front and rear foils. Look closely in the photos and I think you can see wands at the back of the boat as well as the front.

I can't seem to find any rear rudder wands, but even so, I personally think that would be overkill on a hydrofoil this small, its not like people sit there working the rudder trim tab the whole time or something, its easier to do the fine tune adjustments with bodyweight and sailtrim than constantly messing with the flow over the rudder lifting foil. That gets adjusted once or twice a leg if that, not constantly.

Kudos for carrying this project so far.

thanks, if i could only get some actual physical stuff going, virtual sailboats are cool and everything, but they don't float very well.:D

wind_apparent

07-19-2008, 08:19 PM

as far as rudder, I would have that just slide up and down vertically in some kind of housing, same as the main foil. have some drawings of it somewhere already.

and here is the drawing

I'm still trying to figure out how to have dual tillers that control the wormdrive, If I can't figure that one out I'm going to have to do midboom sheeting:mad: damn AOI.

Doug Lord

07-19-2008, 09:19 PM

These pictures are of the first aeroskiff system: the extension tiller was rotated to change the MAINFOIL flap angle. The knob on the front of the tiller controlled rudder flap angle. On my new boat the rudder foil flap and rudder foil angle of incidence will be adjustable.
The little rotating "mast" on the center of the tiller holds two flexibly attached carbon tubes(one now broken) that are then flexibly attached to two delrin collars that slide on each extension tiller. This holds the leeward tiller up. The arrangement makes it easy to control flap movement manually since counter clockwise movement was "Up" flap on either tack; some systems result in different rotation from tack to tack. Each extension tiller is connected to a so-called stainless steel universal joint which is then connected to a machined stainless rod that takes a short rod in the center connected to the push-pull cable.That rod was bent a while back...
This is built heavier than necessary but allows excellent flap control; perhaps you can adapt it to your worm...
In the sailing pix you may be able to see the end of the extension tiller just above the rack seat on the leeward side. The end was angled up about 6" to give better leverage and control.

wind_apparent

07-19-2008, 09:53 PM

does that thing fly? or does it just have a lifting rudder? Thanks for the info, something to look into for sure.

Doug Lord

07-19-2008, 10:03 PM

It flew three times-but not well-before I donated the hull to a sailing school.Since I had play in the push-pull cable and linkage it was a handfull with manual control. I'll use wand control+ manual on the new version. The foils and many parts of the boat are being used on the new boat.

wind_apparent

07-19-2008, 10:57 PM

I was thinking some kind of gearbox mounted to the end of the tiller with 3 miter gears in it. Turn either tiller extension and it turns the gear that turns the treaded rod (mistakenly called it a worm gear on my last diagram). I think it would work, light, strong, easy.;) I would just keep trying out different bevel gear ratios until I found one I liked. Could also do the same thing with a worm drive, put the gear on the treaded rod and connect the drive screw to the two universal extensions.

Doug Lord

07-20-2008, 12:08 PM

Sam here is a closeup of the business end of the extension tiller. Uses a motorcycle hand grip. After a bunch of experimentation I found this best for me.
Zero degree flap position=vertical. Top aft=boat up(flap down).

wind_apparent

07-20-2008, 01:39 PM

WOW, that is awesome

Doug Lord

07-20-2008, 03:38 PM

Works for me. This is a technique you may or may not have heard of. The hand grip structural member is a "bent" carbon rod made with unidirectional 6k carbon tow. I developed this technique about 15 years ago on models.
The roll of tow is available from Aircraft Spruce and Specialty-a must have catalog for projects like yours and mine.( www.aircraftspruce.com ) The part number for the 6k tow is 01-00307. It is invaluable for many jobs.
Anyway,this is how to make a "bent" carbon rod from .125" to .375" OD:
Once you decide on the diameter order silicone tube with at least a .125" wall and an ID the same as the rod you want to make and cut the exact length.(McMaster-Carr is the best source for small quantities of silicone tube that I've found). Then build a jig on a flat board to hold the silicone tube in the shape you want. Calculate the strands of tow you'll need on this basis: 45 strands of 6k tow per .25" diameter. Then wrap the strands(right off the roll) around two headless nails with the distance between them 4" longer than the rod you are making. When you have the right number of strands cut the tow and tie the two ends with a square knot.
Find some stiff but not too stiff wire twice the length of the distance between the nails and bend it in half. Bend each end of the wire over about .5" from the end. Stick one end of the wire thru the loop formed as the carbon tow goes around a nail. Then pull the wire so that the carbon tow loop is at the bend at the halfway point of the wire. Get a pair of vice grips ready to use. Mix your epoxy and pull the carbon tow off the two nails with the wire and coat the tow with epoxy so that the strands are all wet.Don't get epoxy on the ends of the wire! Stick BOTH ends of the wire thru the silicone tube and grasp them with the vice grips and pull the tow slowly thru the silicone tube. When two inches of the tow is hanging out each end of the tube use scissors and cut them off. Clean your scissors, the wire and the silicone tube with the strands in it. Then place the tube in the jig you made earlier and in a while you'll have an exceptionally strong "bent" carbon rod.

wind_apparent

07-20-2008, 04:02 PM

I'm going to just stick with long 3/4'' graphite kite sticks covered with kevlar/carbon sheath, for me the right tiller is a lot like the right putter in golf, I get used to them and I can't use anything else, I'm so used to having a long ass driving stick resting on my shoulder.;) You can get the tubing from any kite shop, its super light and strong, and cheap (2m for $10), and the kevlar/carbon sheath from Solar Composites..... I'm even thinking of using this method for building my Gantry.
23564 23565

wind_apparent

07-29-2008, 07:39 AM

so, I've been working on everything that was left, and finally got to the end....sail ended up right at11sm and looks to be the perfect size for the boat:eek: foils are a little shorter than a moth, it will be better for retractability and can't crash from so high up. like the gantry (55cm) and after messing with the dual tiller thing for way to long just went back to single tiller/midboom sheeting because of the AOI control.... the mast and boom ended up about perfect at 6.5m and 2.4m. just have to finish up some things on the drawings and should be time to start building..... put the main foil a little further forward than normal for a little shared lift and a bigger footprint.

Any impressions:?:

(I'm blaming the crapy picture quality on Rhino Osx, but in reality I think its that I haven't figured out how to get good renderings out of it yet, hopefully in a couple of years they will have a manual or something:p )

bistros

07-29-2008, 08:03 AM

so, I've been working on everything that was left, and finally got to the end....

Nope, that's not the "end" you are seeing, it's the end of the fantasy sitcom portion of the programming. Now you get to move on to the reality TV episodes and the industrial documentaries as you get to inhale noxious gases, clean yourself repeatedly with nasty solvents and find out the numerous areas in which the fantasy world theory doesn't agree with reality.

You are starting the part I love where you get to resolve problems on the fly and really make things work in the real world. I've found keeping a couple of project streams active at once is a moral booster - when you get stopped dead on one stream, you can shift to another and keep the ball rolling. You can't instantly fix every problem you encounter - supply issues, delivery times and god forbid cash (out)flow are show pausers, but there are always areas where progress can be made.

It may be worthwhile to break out your project management tools and break the overall project into tasks and mini-projects. I don't like the "one big project" management method where your tools try to convince you progress overall is behind due to one failed milestone. I'd rather mentally feel good about completing four minor projects with one other project element late.

bistros

07-29-2008, 11:28 AM

Sam:

I've been thinking about a t-foil rudder for the Falco for a long time, and every current implementation of t-foil angle of attack adjustment is way too complex. After months of percolation, my thoughts came down to this:

1) I'm too busy/dense to think about opposing rotation directions for each extension. This means your cone gear implementation won't work as I just don't think fast enough to compensate. I like to keep my head out of the boat.

2) Trying to deal with bicycle-style grip shift stuff out at the end of the extensions will make them too heavy and clunky for me. I'm much like you and I only like very light tiller extensions that don't get in my way. This leads me to want to rotate the whole extension for t-foil angle of attack, isolating the mechanism to the tiller end.

3) I've assumed I would only need/want ONE soft wire "pull" control cable coming from the headstock, therefore one direction ("push") of the bell crank mechanism is under constant tension due to a spring/bungee at the rudder end.

4) I like precise detents delineating rest stops in the adjustment. I'm big on consistency and measurement, so this is critical for me.

5) As always, simplicity is elegance to me, so the design needs to be simple and bombproof.

6) I'm a dual extension guy. My Laser 5000 has a single extension and center sheeting and I hate it more and more after sailing the Falco with dual extensions.

So, here is a hand sketch of my idea. I have NOT prototyped this out yet, but will be doing it this winter. I hope you can project the scribbled 2D perspectives into 3D - I just don't have time to do this in a CAD environment.

Item 1 is a bicycle style cable in sheath. It terminates in a housing on top of the tiller, and the cable continues forward to the tiller-embedded wheel, wrapping around the wheel inside the tiller.

Item 2 is the "wheel" - basically a hub with a smooth cable channel, and the outside edge is crenelated with detent notches. The axle of the hub projects out from the sides of the tiller, providing attachment points for the extensions.

Item 3 is the embedded spring/detent ball that engages the wheel from inside the tiller.

Item 4 is the soft rubber extension attach allowing complete movement of the extensions, while also providing a universal joint for rotation of the extensions

Item(s) 5 are the tiller extensions.

Given the cable "push" direction is handled on the rudder by tension, the tiller end only has to "pull" the cable.

All details of cable travel length and tension can be adjusted by larger or smaller hub wheels and tensioning method on the rudder end. At the rudder end I expect a bell crank with one arm attached to a bungee, and the other attached to the cable.

Doug Lord

07-29-2008, 07:59 PM

Sam, just out of curiosity, what is your rationale for the gantry rather than just extending the hull? I've read some comments by mothies that when taking off in light air and using your weight to pitch the bow up that the gantry can be a drag.
Of course using something like the f-box can make that pitch-up unnecessary.
What are your thoughts?
Drawings look good.

wind_apparent

07-30-2008, 12:39 AM

You are starting the part I love where you get to resolve problems on the fly and really make things work in the real world

thats the part I love too:D ,my everyday job is in electronics R&D, so tech problems and real world problem solving is my natural environment.

You can't instantly fix every problem you encounter - supply issues, delivery times and god forbid cash (out)flow are show pausers

I can already see the $$$$$$$ part becoming a problem right away with the way prices are skyrocketing on everything. I've already found some partial sponsors for kit, but I'm thinking of putting a pitch and package together and shopping for a finacial backer, got some leads so I hope something works out.

I don't like the "one big project" management method where your tools try to convince you progress overall is behind due to one failed milestone. I'd rather mentally feel good about completing four minor projects with one other project element late.

I'm just happy to be done drawing, I'm taking my summer vacation at the end of this week (10 days in St. Simons Island GA) and I'll come back refreshed and ready to work. bullit lists are my friend, just like to be crossing stuff off, don't really care what, it all needs to get done eventually.

I've been thinking about a t-foil rudder for the Falco for a long time, and every current implementation of t-foil angle of attack adjustment is way too complex. After months of percolation, my thoughts came down to this:

I like this idea alot, not sure if it would work for my application because of the stress involved in having the foils support all the weight, need it to be locked in and stable because I want to go flapless with the rudder foil, so no shock cords for me.... but keep me posted on how it's working out, because I'm sure I can glean something from it and I'm not ready to give up on dual tillers just yet......

Item 4 is the soft rubber extension attach allowing complete movement of the extensions, while also providing a universal joint for rotation of the extensions

I've been looking for these as well, I only seem to be able to find the expensive ones in sailing catologs, hope to find some cheap ones in Mcmastercarr or something....I think I might go through a fair number of them just messing around, guess I should find out what they are made of and
machine a bunch on the lathe.

just out of curiosity, what is your rationale for the gantry rather than just extending the hull? I've read some comments by mothies that when taking off in light air and using your weight to pitch the bow up that the gantry can be a drag.
Of course using something like the f-box can make that pitch-up unnecessary.
What are your thoughts?

How do they feel about the gantry when its blowing? I have a gantry to extend the hull and add to foil separation and thats about it. mothies have to throw their whole body around to move their weight because they are sitting down, if I'm out on the trap I can do the same thing with a lot less effort by taking a couple of steps backwords and leaning out:D (ah the trapeze) if you watch Sam Pascoe in the Rs600ff vid (the original light air one) and then in his moth vids you can see how much easier it is to be fluid on the 600 by just moving your feet instead of lurching your body while sitting down on the moth. I have been thinking of some devise for AOI control (F-box) on the main lifting foil, mostly I'm not that sure how to make a case that allows fore/aft pivot movement without being sloppy or messing up foil edges...:?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

bistros

07-30-2008, 08:48 AM

thats the part I love too:D ,my everyday job is in electronics R&D, so tech problems and real world problem solving is my natural environment.

I've done a lot of i8031, Z80, i80x86, 68000 embedded systems work ages ago. Mostly real time stuff coded in assembly language & C. Been involved in creating a few application specific real time operating systems. Banking, transaction processing.

I like this idea alot, not sure if it would work for my application because of the stress involved in having the foils support all the weight, need it to be locked in and stable because I want to go flapless with the rudder foil, so no shock cords for me.... but keep me posted on how it's working out, because I'm sure I can glean something from it and I'm not ready to give up on dual tillers just yet......

I've done a re-think and mentally went back to first year engineering - What is the most efficient offset drive system at low cost? Chain drive. Think about a plastic chain drive wrapping around a tiller mounted sprocket and routed back through the tiller to turn 90 degrees around a couple nylon idlers and go through the rudder core to wrap around another sprocket on the lateral foil axis. No slop, positive control in both push and pull, ability to add microfine detent for hands off control position lockdown. Would preclude a retractable rudder as lengths need to be fixed. Very light if done right.

In terms of load, that is more of a design factor regarding offset of bell crank lever arm from the rotational axis than it is a given.

I've been looking for these as well, I only seem to be able to find the expensive ones in sailing catologs, hope to find some cheap ones in Mcmastercarr or something....I think I might go through a fair number of them just messing around, guess I should find out what they are made of and machine a bunch on the lathe.

There are lots of options to consider here outside the realm of expensive sailing parts. One I've thought of is using short sections of the stainless steel mesh over rubber hose tubing used for household plumbing. Another choice would be stainless steel automotive gas lines. Both offer enough flex, they are not sloppy under rotational torque and can be cleanly shortened to a 15-20cm length which would fit this application cleanly.

I have a gantry to extend the hull and add to foil separation and thats about it. mothies have to throw their whole body around to move their weight because they are sitting down, if I'm out on the trap I can do the same thing with a lot less effort by taking a couple of steps backwords and leaning out:D (ah the trapeze) if you watch Sam Pascoe in the Rs600ff vids and then in his moth vids you can see how much easier it is to be fluid on the 600 by just moving your feet instead of lurching your body while sitting down on the moth. I have been thinking of some devise for AOI control on the main lifting foil, mostly I'm not that sure how to make a case that allows fore aft movement without being sloppy or messing up foil edges...:?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

The other major benefits of gantries are:

- They make your tiller extensions useful from the trapeze from the back of the rack. Conventional tiller placement used from the back of extended racks makes the extensions join the tiller at an extreme acute angle and they are mechanically problematic.
- They open up the cockpit by moving the tiller further back making for easier crossings on maneuvers.
- There is a school of thought that gantry mounted rudders appear to have the effect of increasing apparent waterline length of a given hull without increasing wetted surface area.

yachtyakka

07-31-2008, 03:29 AM

can I publish your design on my yachting website?

www.yachtyakka.co.nz

wind_apparent

07-31-2008, 09:14 PM

can I publish your design on my yachting website?

Sure, any extra publicity would be great.:p

SR-71 Monofoiler
Designers Name: Samuel Schneider, Boulder CO USA
LOA: 4m + 55cm gantry
Beam At Chines: 38cm
Beam At Gunnels: 80cm
Beam of Racks: 180cm, adjustable out to 250cm
Rocker: 3cm bow and stern
Mast Length: 6.5m + 50cm kingpin (7m overall)
Boom Length: 240cm
Sail Area: 11sm (full batten pocket luff)
Target Weight: 38-40kg all up
Proposed Setup: Trapeze equipped, end boom sheeting, dual tillers, standard vang, downhaul and outhaul.
Rudder Foil: NACA 66014 vertical, H105 lifting section
Main Foil: NACA 66014 vertical, H105 lifting section 7deg vertical AOA
Construction: Carbon/Kevlar/Epoxy with Foam core

Doug Lord

07-31-2008, 09:21 PM

Sam, you might want to use the term "monofoiler" since there is a speed sailing project called "Monofoil": http://www.monofoil.com/boat/index.php

wind_apparent

07-31-2008, 09:26 PM

thanks Doug, taken care of.:D

yachtyakka

07-31-2008, 09:35 PM

http://yachtyakka.co.nz/2008/07/foilers/

is there anything else you would like to send in?

wind_apparent

07-31-2008, 10:02 PM

is there anything else you would like to send in?

let me send you some full size hi res pics and a little more info.......

wind_apparent

07-31-2008, 10:34 PM

It looks like I'm going to be able to use rubber hose as the universal joint on my double tiller, now I need to figure out how they will connect to the gears that turn the AOI shaft, if I can't work it out, at least I know a good working system for rudder flap control.

watch this vid at about the 32sec mark

www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKNYmacedDM&eurl

Doug Lord

08-01-2008, 06:08 PM

can I publish your design on my yachting website?

www.yachtyakka.co.nz
----------------------------------
Nice Layout here ,Sam!

yachtyakka

08-04-2008, 03:26 AM

any chance getting those specs?

thanks for the visit Doug, Should post some of those computer images soon

yachtyakka

08-06-2008, 09:13 AM

let me send you some full size hi res pics and a little more info.......

have you sent these yet? nothing has arrived yet

wind_apparent

08-06-2008, 06:18 PM

have you sent these yet? nothing has arrived yet

no, I'm out of town right now, but I'll get them to you as soon as I'm on my comuter.....

wind_apparent

08-14-2008, 01:12 PM

Back in town, and it looks like I'm famous:rolleyes: There are two known things in the world of sailing, if you don't have pics it didn't happen, and once you've made it to sailing anarchy your probably screwed:D

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=76991

thanks for the press release Bistros:D

I guess this is what happens when you name your project after a the worlds fastest spy plane, if I can't stay under the radar at least maybe I can outrun the hype ;)

bistros

08-14-2008, 01:19 PM

wind_apparent

08-14-2008, 01:27 PM

Hey, I was trying to use a Jedi Mind trick to get the radar off you till next spring. Someone found you through the yachtyakka site and outed you.

"This is not the Hydrofoil your looking for" "You can go about your Business" "move along" :D

I saw someone has made a kit boat based off the falco, looks pretty cool, are you part of this deal?

bistros

08-14-2008, 01:47 PM

"This is not the Hydrofoil your looking for" "You can go about your Business" "move along" :D

I saw someone has made a kit boat based off the falco, looks pretty cool, are you part of this deal?

The new kit is based on the Quetzal - a previous design of Eric's before the Falco. They tweaked the design for flat pack panel kit build, took the rig design from the Falco and I watched it being built in four weeks this spring. Eric built it in the shop with me while I sanded the Falco - and when I was tired of sanding the Falco, I sanded the new Quetzal.

It's 20 pounds heavier than the Falco, and the hull shape is a lot less complex. Sailing head to head on the water the Falco is noticeably faster if the crew weigh in about the same. The Quetzal is a really good design to get people single handing on the trapeze in a skiffish boat at a far lower cost than the SwiftSolo or Musto Performance Skiff.

The Quetzal is a little more forgiving than the Falco on the water - hard chines and it will still plane heeled over on the secondary chine. I sailed the previous version a lot - it is a big part of the reason I worked with Eric to begin with. He's pretty gifted as a designer and he's really dedicated to light weight, simplicity and right materials for the right task.

I'm not part of the deal financially, but I'm trying to help promote things a bit - the people involved in the project (Dave, Phil & Eric) helped me a lot. The work I do on the Falco is being used as a development proving ground for the Quetzal - I've incorporated a new rig tensioning system, and done some refinement on the rigging that will make it to the Quetzal if it proves out.

--
Bill

Chris Ostlind

08-14-2008, 01:51 PM

...There are two known things in the world of sailing, if you don't have pics it didn't happen, and once you've made it to sailing anarchy your probably screwed... if I can't stay under the radar at least maybe I can outrun the hype.

Yep, Sam, right on all accounts. It all depends on just who is doing the hyping, though. I'd say that anything that emanates from Bistros' pen will be well thought-out material and that most of the rest will be vacuous effluvium.

Beware of hanger's-on with only personal vested interests.

Nap of the Earth, Bubba....

Chris

wind_apparent

08-14-2008, 03:29 PM

I'd say that anything that emanates from Bistros' pen will be well thought-out material and that most of the rest will be vacuous effluvium.

true, true, when I said thanks for the press release Bistros, what I meant was "Thanks for the well informed snippet that you put on SA to defuse the situation a little" :D

yachtyakka

08-14-2008, 05:25 PM

Good morning yachties,

I'm sure most regular posters on "that" site will be a few light years behind your thinking. However a site that boosts more than 35,000,000 hits permonth must be a good thing as foilers moves toward main stream yachting.

Time will tell.

leverage off the lime light, you never know who may come out if the woodwork with a good idea.

Happy Sailing

Steve
www.yachtyakka.co.nz

PS have you sent me those other images yet?

wind_apparent

08-14-2008, 07:08 PM

I'm sure most regular posters on "that" site will be a few light years behind your thinking. However a site that boosts more than 35,000,000 hits permonth must be a good thing as foilers moves toward main stream yachting.

I was just having a little fun, actually couldn't be happier that its out there, good to know there are people out there besides disignforum.net crazies (me included) that think the project has legs, could come in very handy when I go sponsor shopping or want to start a national class association. I have been a little busy since I got into town but I'll try to get the bigger pics out to you. I can't PM them full size as an attachment, so could you Pm me your E-mail?

Thanks,

Sam

SimonN

08-14-2008, 09:11 PM

Really great project and I ish you all the best with it. As some have said, don't let the negativity of others get you down. Here are a few "real world" observations for you.

1. Don't follow anyones pet theory. Go with ideas that have been proven to work.

2. Spend as much time as possible refining the systems that work the main foil. The biggest difference between Moths is the way in which this control works. This ranges from the wand, the connectors and control rods, the gearing of those (how much wand movement moves the flap how much) and much more. Even the flexibility of the wand has a big impact on the way the boat foils. This is what makes the boat sail well. You can take 2 boats with teh same foils, in the same place and a well set up boat is a dream to sail and a badly set up one is impossible. Even on a near "one design", the Bladerider, this happens.

3. On a new design with no reference points, I think that the f-box idea is good but I would use a screw instead of pins, so you can really fine tune it. In addition, I would make it possible to take the foil apart, like teh Bladerider, so you can change the angle of the foil in regard to the strut. In that way, you can alter the main variables.

4. Don't get too hung up on the rudder mechanism. I was going to start a design project to look at how to make this work better on my Moth but Rohan Veal stopped me, saying that the boats are now getting set up so well that there is little need for rudder foil changes.

5. As you rightly point out, you shouldn't need to move back and forth too much but you do need to be able to trapeze effortlessly. You need to reduce the forward pull of the trap wire as much as possible, so make sure you have enough rake in your rig. The more upright it is, the more forward pull.

6. Veal Heal is real and works, Therefore, you need to be able to sail the boat with it over on top of you. This si hard when trapezing. The lower the trap wire on the mast, the more you can heal but the more stress on your body.

However, the best advice I can give you is just "DO IT". You can spend forever theoretically working out what to do but it is best done on the water. And once launched, don't give up. Irrespective of what some might think, you cannot learn anything in only a few sails. I think the chances of you getting it right first time are small, so expect that and at best, you will be prleasantly suprised. Finally, if you do actually build it, I bet you will be suprised by how many experienced foilers will help you make it work.

wind_apparent

08-14-2008, 10:19 PM

1. Don't follow anyones pet theory. Go with ideas that have been proven to work.

As far as it goes now I'm using all standard Moth technology except for the dual tiller worm drive.

2. Spend as much time as possible refining the systems that work the main foil. The biggest difference between Moths is the way in which this control works. This ranges from the wand, the connectors and control rods, the gearing of those (how much wand movement moves the flap how much) and much more. Even the flexibility of the wand has a big impact on the way the boat foils. This is what makes the boat sail well. You can take 2 boats with teh same foils, in the same place and a well set up boat is a dream to sail and a badly set up one is impossible. Even on a near "one design", the Bladerider, this happens.

I'll keep this in mind, it will probably be hit and miss at first, I'm going to just use standard Moth wand hardware and go from there.

3. On a new design with no reference points, I think that the f-box idea is good but I would use a screw instead of pins, so you can really fine tune it. In addition, I would make it possible to take the foil apart, like teh Bladerider, so you can change the angle of the foil in regard to the strut. In that way, you can alter the main variables.

I have been thinking about fbox style AOI control, I have a couple ideas, one uses an adjustable screw and some liear rail bearings. Eventually I would love two piece foils like bladerider, but it will probably be a basic straight section foil for the first bit, no use building a fancy foil that might break right away.

4. Don't get too hung up on the rudder mechanism. I was going to start a design project to look at how to make this work better on my Moth but Rohan Veal stopped me, saying that the boats are now getting set up so well that there is little need for rudder foil changes.

well, that would make dual tillers a lot easier :D , and i could try no control at first then switch if I needed to, with flapless all I need to change is the tiller and pin to retool the system for twist control.

5. As you rightly point out, you shouldn't need to move back and forth too much but you do need to be able to trapeze effortlessly. You need to reduce the forward pull of the trap wire as much as possible, so make sure you have enough rake in your rig. The more upright it is, the more forward pull.

Hope to find a good compromise for that.

6. Veal Heal is real and works, Therefore, you need to be able to sail the boat with it over on top of you. This si hard when trapezing. The lower the trap wire on the mast, the more you can heal but the more stress on your body.

I'll just try everything till it works....

I think the chances of you getting it right first time are small, so expect that and at best, you will be prleasantly suprised. Finally, if you do actually build it, I bet you will be suprised by how many experienced foilers will help you make it work.

to try to get it closer to "right" as fast as possible I plan on using known factors.

- A CST mast with known flex characteristics.
- a Sail designed and built by Bill Hansen
- Stolen Moth technology that already has 10 years of development

should take some of the growing pains away. and as far as experienced foilers to help, the list is already pretty long and getting longer, (I'm thinking of taking it out to the Gorge next August to get some pointers and some feedback)

thanks for the input..

Sam

wind_apparent

08-17-2008, 10:17 AM

Does anyone have any information about trapeze rig loading? my mast is going to be mounted on a king post stub, so I need to make sure the post can take the load, that and I have to make sure to reinforce the deck under the post enough to take the pressure, anyone know the formula involved for this?

thanks

Sam

Doug Lord

08-17-2008, 11:57 AM

Couldn't you get some accurate info from the RS600FF guys? I would guess that the trapeze load(your weight @195lb,right?) will add about 33% to the mast compression load.

wind_apparent

08-17-2008, 01:24 PM

Couldn't you get some accurate info from the RS600FF guys? I would guess that the trapeze load(your weight @195lb,right?) will add about 33% to the mast compression load.

I could get it from the 600 guys, if i could find any to contact.:rolleyes: I'm looking for the formula not a percentage.

Doug Lord

08-17-2008, 03:02 PM

There are two formulas in Skenes; how did you calculate your shroud loads?

wind_apparent

08-17-2008, 03:33 PM

There are two formulas in Skenes; how did you calculate your shroud loads?

I didn't do them, since I'm using a contender mast, I'm just going to use the same gauge shrouds as a contender, and trap as well, so I know the rigging will be fine. Its just that I spaced doing the compression loads on the kingpin and I want to make sure I get something strong enough when I order my tubing.

I know that contenders seem lofi in comparison to what I have going on with this project, but CST's new high Modulus contender mast is the right length (6.5m) has good flex characteristics, and is only 46mm, so super low drag, theres no need to pay for tooling if something usable already exists.

wind_apparent

08-19-2008, 06:23 PM

well, started cutting wood (MDF) today, I'll post pics when I have the frames together.

bistros

08-21-2008, 09:54 AM

well, started cutting wood (MDF) today, I'll post pics when I have the frames together.

CNC cut or by template?

Remember to permanently mark down registration points & alignment lines that will help lining up the frames when putting them on the strongback. Get/make a few long consistent battens for checking fairness of the frames when lining them up.

Getting hold of a spinning laser level used for hanging suspended ceilings can really help your set up time. By knowing your starting datum point(s) are right, everything following is easier. Also, beg, borrow, buy or steal three times as many c-clamps as you think you will need. A bunch of hand ratcheting clamps help as well. High visibility florescent fishing line works well too for lining things up.

Every minute spent lining things up and verifying setup reduces fairing time by ten minutes, and could save the build. 80% prep, 5% execution and 15% cleanup.

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 10:23 AM

just some frames and stongback stuff, looks like I'm doing all the stanchons on the CNC next Friday if the CNC guy can get me in that day......he's also having a hard time opening all my DFX files, so we'll see. (I'm doing a male mold, so lots of foam fairing in my future no mater what.:( )

Doug Lord

08-21-2008, 02:30 PM

Sure, any extra publicity would be great.:p

SR-71 Monofoiler
Designers Name: Samuel Schneider, Boulder CO USA
LOA: 4m + 55cm gantry
Beam At Chines: 38cm
Beam At Gunnels: 80cm
Beam of Racks: 180cm, adjustable out to 250cm
Rocker: 3cm bow and stern
Mast Length: 6.5m + 50cm kingpin (7m overall)
Boom Length: 240cm
Sail Area: 11sm (full batten pocket luff)
Target Weight: 38-40kg all up
Proposed Setup: Trapeze equipped, end boom sheeting, dual tillers, standard vang, downhaul and outhaul.
Rudder Foil: NACA 66014 vertical, H105 lifting section
Main Foil: NACA 66014 vertical, H105 lifting section 7deg vertical AOA
Construction: Carbon/Kevlar/Epoxy with Foam core
=====================================
I realize it's too late on your current boat but it's been bugging me for a while: I would hope you would be amenable to modifying the rule to allow the LOA to be 4.55m and allowing a potential designer to eliminate the gantry.
The gantry(in my opinion) is a rule induced abberation which is NOT necessary for a successfull foiler design. In fact, there are really good reasons why it should be eliminated:
1) by allowing the hull to be a bit longer the available hull buoyancy is increased so the L/beam ratio can be increased reducing resistance and allowing the boat to achieve takeoff a bit sooner.
2) In my humble opinion, it is somewhat ugly and help creates a "contraption" appearance to some onlookers.
3) When taking off without an F-box(angle of incidence control) a gantry (and transom)drags when the boat is pitched bow up.
4) The ONLY reason for a gantry is to allow the foil footprint to be better on a boat NOT DESIGNED FOR FOILS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
---------
So whataya say,can the rule be amended to allow "gantry-less" designs 4.55m LOA?

foilman24

08-21-2008, 03:57 PM

In my humble opinion, it is somewhat ugly and help creates a "contraption" appearance to some onlookers.

just a couple of questions dougie

- have you seen your own "barge foiler" pictures, now thats the definition of ugly, and it has a "contraption" appearance to all onlookers.

- aren't you the guy who used a Motogrip as a tiller control?

why don't you leave the guy build his boat, don't you have a model foiler to go build?

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 04:18 PM

no need for that, there is a forum for that kinda thing, Sailing Anarchy

- I think I would lean more towards optional gantry, if you don't want one don't put one on ;) if your going to use one, It can't be longer than 55cm. That way designers could design from there own standpoint. I wanted to design a boat that had a 4 meter hull, that was the first point in my criteria, I would be more inclined to get rid of the gantry all together than to extend the hull, 4meters is such a nice length. :p

I'm more worried about workability and proof of concept than little evolutions. It looks like I'm going to have an AOI control for the main foil, so I'm not even sure if it would matter that much.
That and I like the Ganrty look, not sure why, looks like a cool wheely bar for my water drag racer. That and who doesn't like a little carbon "bling" on their boat?

Doug Lord

08-21-2008, 05:22 PM

Aw,schucks....
---------------------------
Have you figured out how to do the incidence control?
===========
Seen this pix? Look at it closely....

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 07:29 PM

Seen this pix? Look at it closely....

Um.........what pic :?: :p

Doug Lord

08-21-2008, 07:43 PM

I thought I got rid of that! I tried to post a pix of a unique monofoiler with twin vertical fins/struts but it wouldn't post. It was a "BMP" file....

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 07:45 PM

is it off of a website? mabe just post a link.

bistros

08-21-2008, 07:58 PM

=====================================
The gantry(in my opinion) is a rule induced abberation which is NOT necessary for a successfull foiler design. In fact, there are really good reasons why it should be eliminated:
1) by allowing the hull to be a bit longer the available hull buoyancy is increased so the L/beam ratio can be increased reducing resistance and allowing the boat to achieve takeoff a bit sooner.
2) In my humble opinion, it is somewhat ugly and help creates a "contraption" appearance to some onlookers.
3) When taking off without an F-box(angle of incidence control) a gantry (and transom)drags when the boat is pitched bow up.
4) The ONLY reason for a gantry is to allow the foil footprint to be better on a boat NOT DESIGNED FOR FOILS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Interesting perspective on gantries. I can't say I agree with some of the reasoning.

1) Longer hulls weigh more than the same overall length platform with a gantry. Eliminating 18 inches of hull and replacing it with one or so pounds of G4 tubing will weigh less.

2) In addition to longer hulls weighing more, there is significantly more wetted surface area. The length to beam ratio may be higher in a longer boat, but the increased drag due to more wetted surface area would be an issue to quantify.

3) Ugliness (and beauty) is in the eye of the beholder. From a pure engineering standpoint, beautiful is achieving a desired result in the simplest manner. Function dictates form, and that form is technically beautiful if function is achieved.

4) If on-the-water main foil angle of incidence control were a prerequisite for sustained and regular liftoff and foiling, it would be present on all foilers. Most designs need adjustability for a tuning period and during design refinement. Once a design is dialed in, most adjustments can be simplified or eliminated. A gantry equipped foiler may have less drag when angled bow-up - you don't know until tow-testing is done with both options and the drag measured on a load cell. Any other opinions are just wild-assed conjecture.

5) It is a designer's prerogative to achieve lifting foil separation and balanced lift by whatever means they determine best. If they choose a gantry to increase the distance, that is their choice and it is as valid as any other method. You or I have no place criticizing someone else's choices unless there is a repeatable body of evidence to the contrary. The Mirabaud space frame foiler takes this to the logical extreme.

Although difficult, effort must be made to separate personal opinions and irrelevent aesthetic preferences from scientifically determined data.

Doug Lord

08-21-2008, 08:54 PM

Interesting perspective on gantries. I can't say I agree with some of the reasoning.

1) Longer hulls weigh more than the same overall length platform with a gantry. Eliminating 18 inches of hull and replacing it with one or so pounds of G4 tubing will weigh less.

2) In addition to longer hulls weighing more, there is significantly more wetted surface area. The length to beam ratio may be higher in a longer boat, but the increased drag due to more wetted surface area would be an issue to quantify.

3) Ugliness (and beauty) is in the eye of the beholder. From a pure engineering standpoint, beautiful is achieving a desired result in the simplest manner. Function dictates form, and that form is technically beautiful if function is achieved.

4) If on-the-water main foil angle of incidence control were a prerequisite for sustained and regular liftoff and foiling, it would be present on all foilers. Most designs need adjustability for a tuning period and during design refinement. Once a design is dialed in, most adjustments can be simplified or eliminated. A gantry equipped foiler may have less drag when angled bow-up - you don't know until tow-testing is done with both options and the drag measured on a load cell. Any other opinions are just wild-assed conjecture.

5) It is a designer's prerogative to achieve lifting foil separation and balanced lift by whatever means they determine best. If they choose a gantry to increase the distance, that is their choice and it is as valid as any other method. You or I have no place criticizing someone else's choices unless there is a repeatable body of evidence to the contrary. The Mirabaud space frame foiler takes this to the logical extreme.

Although difficult, effort must be made to separate personal opinions and irrelevent aesthetic preferences from scientifically determined data.

=========================
1&2-Narrower hull would trump both weight(by making the whole boat lighter) and wetted surface-reducing wavemaking drag by increasing L/B ratio in addition to eliminating the drag(well documented in Veals blog) of a gantry in the water. Not opinion-fact.
4- not true. Most people had not realized how "shifting gears" by changing the mainfoil angle of incidence from take off to cruise to high speed cruise could reduce drag until John Ilett came out with the F-box. The benefits are well known by many hydrofoil designers- not just Ilett. Fact-not opinion.
--"Any other opinions are just wild-assed conjecture." Dead wrong.
--Mirabaud,of course, does not have a "gantry".
--Most monofoilers DESIGNED FROM SCRATCH AS FOILERS do not use gantrys.
========================
And by the way: I was asking a question of Sam in regard to the rules of his proposed SR71 Class. My comments are not criticisms of him but are the reasons why I wanted to see the gantry as an option rather than mandated for a 4.55m foiler.
He has repeatedly asked for comments regarding those rules.

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 08:58 PM

bistro's, you crack me up, always trying to mix "science" and "testing" with performance sailboats, thats just a bad idea. :rolleyes: :D

1) Longer hulls weigh more than the same overall length platform with a gantry. Eliminating 18 inches of hull and replacing it with one or so pounds of G4 tubing will weigh less.
all good points,

"I" especially like the lighter/less drag argument. (thats what I think as well)

as far as angle of incidence control, I think it might be a great idea for this project. First, because a lot of respected and experienced mothies are looking into it and think it's worth messing with. And second, I'm not real sure how this hull is going to sit in the water, I don't want to guess and then find out that I need to yank out the foil case and change its angle.

Doug Lord

08-21-2008, 09:09 PM

Sam, I think if you calculate the reduction in beam by eliminating the gantry for a given displacement hull you'd find that the longer(narrower) hull would weigh the same or less than a shorter boat with a gantry.

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 09:17 PM

1&2-Narrower hull would trump both weight(by making the whole boat lighter) and wetted surface-reducing wavemaking drag by increasing L/B ratio in addition to eliminating the drag(well documented in Veals blog) of a gantry in the water. Not opinion-fact.

well, its unfortunate that a narrower hull will also be "tippier" and therefore harder to sail. I think its going to be pretty hard to keep this boat upright to begin with.

And by the way: I was asking a question of Sam in regard to the rules of his proposed SR71 Class. My comments are not criticisms of him but are the reasons why I wanted to see the gantry as an option rather than mandated for a 4.55m foiler. He has repeatedly asked for comments regarding those rules.

thats true, you never know where your going to get the next good idea. I love any and all feedback.

Sam

Doug Lord

08-21-2008, 09:22 PM

I don't remember: what were or are your objections to (removable)buoyancy pods like these on the M4? Tames a skinny boat-and I have personal experience with pods on a small "tri" with a L/B narrower than a Moth.

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 09:29 PM

I don't remember: what were or are your objections to (removable)buoyancy pods like these on the M4? I have none, I plan to use some at first as "training wheels" untill my skill level goes up. But I plan to remove them when I don't "need" them anymore, alot of the appeal that the monofoil concept holds for me personally is the balance aspect. if that wasn't the case, I would be building a scaled down trifoiler like hydroptere.

foilman24

08-21-2008, 10:12 PM

It looks to me like your trying to get him to build the boat that you would build, not the one he has designed. why don't you switch gears and try to help the guy get this project rolling, not backtrack and bring up new problems and considerations. Why would anyone who had a rooting interest in this project suggest a redesign after he knows that the design has been finalized and production has started?

Go Sam GO!!!!!!! don't look back.

wind_apparent

08-21-2008, 10:37 PM

wow, cheerleaders.....................:D

bistros

08-21-2008, 10:47 PM

bistro's, you crack me up, always trying to mix "science" and "testing" with performance sailboats, thats just a bad idea. :rolleyes: :D

all good points, "I" especially like the lighter/less drag argument. (thats what I think as well)

as far as angle of incidence control, I think it might be a great idea for this project. First, because a lot of respected and experienced mothies are looking into it and think it's worth messing with. And second, I'm not real sure how this hull is going to sit in the water, I don't want to guess and then find out that I need to yank out the foil case and change its angle.

Taken for what they are worth, my least hope for posting is to entertain!

I know I have irrational belief in testing, compiling data and evaluating results dispassionately. There is just no magic or religious fervor to my conclusions, and I try not to say anything that could be construed as conclusive without a repeatable proof. I'm a boring damned doubter who just lacks faith, excitement and conviction.

If I were a true believer, I would accept the posts written on the Sacred Blogs as carved in stone tablets and issued from the mouth of God. Sadly, I have no trust in anything written on the Internet, and living my faithless lifestyle has led me to question everything, even from Saint Rohan.

I think the F-box will save you a lot of F-words during tuning and testing. I also think that once you get things dialed in you will probably reduce the AOI settings to 2-3 positions, which may be able to be handled with a far simpler, positive and lighter setup.

As far as how the hull sits on it's design lines, that is really an operator issue. The thing is so light that your weight will always be the determining factor in things. Two inches of operator movement can completely alter trim.

Paul B

08-22-2008, 12:19 AM

The gantry(in my opinion) is a rule induced abberation which is NOT necessary for a successfull foiler design. In fact, there are really good reasons why it should be eliminated:
2) In my humble opinion, it is somewhat ugly and help creates a "contraption" appearance to some onlookers.

I wonder who built this ugly Rube Goldberg Contraption?

Hoo Boy, POT meet KETTLE.

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 12:42 AM

bistro's, you crack me up, always trying to mix "science" and "testing" with performance sailboats, thats just a bad idea

I hope you didn't take offence, that wasn't what I intended, I was being sarcastic. I love your input, I am also a "prove it" kind of guy. Science, testing, and R&D are the only proof there is. give me numbers, pictures, and proof. ;)

bistros

08-22-2008, 06:55 AM

I hope you didn't take offence, that wasn't what I intended, I was being sarcastic. I love your input, I am also a "prove it" kind of guy. Science, testing, and R&D are the only proof there is. give me numbers, pictures, and proof. ;)

Me? Take offense? Not. Sarcasm is a way of life in my family. The only disappointment with subtle sarcasm is that the intended recipients rarely get it.

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 09:58 AM

I think the F-box will save you a lot of F-words during tuning and testing. I also think that once you get things dialed in you will probably reduce the AOI settings to 2-3 positions, which may be able to be handled with a far simpler, positive and lighter setup.

Thats what I was thinking as well......

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 10:53 AM

Doug Lord

08-22-2008, 06:35 PM

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 06:48 PM

Now, that WOULD be heavy.....

how so? it wouldn't be that different or much bigger than the foam core carbon gantries the bladeriders use, you could even make a nice carbon tube space frame and mount a 3 layer carbon skin that matched the hull shape (like race car constrution) and it would effectively stop gantry induced drag.

Doug Lord

08-22-2008, 06:56 PM

In essence you'd have a double transom wouldn't you? If this is ok why not just leave it as a designers decision? Do you think the longer hull would have an advantage? The whole idea of the gantry seems to me sort of an after thought kind of thing-like I14's 18's and Moth's discovered at some point that they had to move everything back to make the boat work better.And now,unfortunately ,some think a foiler "needs' one....
Did you get the picture "fixed" so you could see it well enough to notice details?

Paul B

08-22-2008, 06:57 PM

so Doug, I was thinking about it last night (the whole gantry thing) and came up with this: There isn't a rule that says you cant build your gantry to exactly match the transom of the boat, so it someone wanted to "extend" the effective waterline of their boat by making the gantry a bolt on extension that matches the hull shape, well that would be fine. :p (if it was such a huge issue I'd think the mothies would be doing it already)

You might find this as funny as some of the rest of us.

Why would **** **** want you to openly embrace a certain size increase, and also things like bouyancy bags?

Could it be due to the pre-existing sketch that **** **** tries to pass off as his own, but is actually sketched by someone else?

Guess ol' ****** won't be able to con anyone into coming up with a new design to the 4m parameter, so better to try to con you into modifying the rules to the "class" in the hope he can then con someone else into funding this boondoggle. I think he was hoping someone would give him $500K to design (right, someone else's design), develop, and produce this monument to his genius.

Why he can't just be like you and Bistros and design it, build it, and sail it continues to be a mystery to all. Probably his ego can't handle another public failure like his AeroStiff (Non)Foiler.

Doug Lord

08-22-2008, 07:11 PM

Paul B-you are a crude son of a bitch! That boat was designed by me with the sketch done by Eric Sponberg from the model in the pictures below. The design incorporates MANY things just now coming to the fore in monofoiler design including buoyancy pods(before the M4), adjustable angle of incidence main foil(before John Ilett),unstayed mast before everybody on a foiler.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeff, if you delete"Paul B's" Crap, in deference to Sam's great thread, please delete this as well.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Features of the aeroSKIFF 14:
TARGET SPECIFICATIONS / aeroSKIFF 14 / based on 250lb. max crew-drawings in post 15 based on 220lb. max crew.
-------------------------------------------
1) LOA 14'8" Beam 12'(drawings in post 15 show 10' beam-beam may be increased to reduce buoyancy pod size and to help make crew weight range wider)
-------------------------------------------
2) Target ready to fly boat weight: 120 lb.s
--------------------------------------------
3) Max Crew 250lb.s ; target minimum crew 120lb. -----------------------------------------------
4) Flying weight: 370lb.s
-----------------------------------------------
5) SA 143 sq.ft. square topped, camber induced , main only, unstayed mast ,extended luff, modified wishbone, midboom sheeting.
-----------------------------------------------
6) Standard main foil area 1.68 sq.ft.
-----------------------------------------------
7) Mainfoil loading @ 80% 176lb. sq. ft.
-----------------------------------------------
8) Rudder foil area 50% mainfoil area.
-----------------------------------------------
9) SA/mainfoil area: 85sq. ft. per sq.ft. foil area.
-----------------------------------------------
10) "Wing Loading"( all up weight divided by SA) =2.58lb.s per sq.ft. SA.
------------------------------------------------
11) Draft ,off foils; foils extended= 3.75'-variable.
===============================================
Features
===============================================
1) Forward third of sail comes completely down to the deck; the boom is a modified version of a wishbone boom with a cross member just forward of mid length that takes the mainsheet. The sheet is led to a traveller on the forward beam allowing the sheet to come from forward. A twin vang set up will be used should a vang be required.
-----------------------------------------------
2) Foils retract to facilitate beach launching.
-----------------------------------------------
3) Sliding single bench seat; slides easily and contains ballast compartment for one design class weight equalization system.Motion control system that prevents runaway seat in adverse situations.
----------------------------------------------
4) Standard foils optimized for low speed takeoff; optional tip extentions; optional high speed foils.
-----------------------------------------------
5) Buoyancy pods approx 1.56 cu' per side; larger optional pods available for training.(see approx 3 cu. ft. pods illustrated in the sketches in post #15)
-----------------------------------------------
6)Rudder: unique design slides up and down in daggerboard style slot; stepped rudder flap designed to allow variable rudder area between non foiling and foiling; Target is to have rudder throw and sensitivity the same on or off
foils.
-----------------------------------------------
7) Double ended hull facilitates earlist 0 to takeoff; facillitates pitch change to allow early takeoff though foil system may not require this.
-----------------------------------------------
8) Trampoline each side with heel cutouts allowing quick, secure seat movement.
-----------------------------------------------
9) Foils designed to take loads imposed by jumping which can be initiated by twisting hiking stick(s).System bypasses wand but still utilizes forward /rear foil interconnect.
-----------------------------------------------
10) Variable main foil "gear shift" angle of incidence adjustment. From "set it and forget it" to fine tuning main foil drag.
-----------------------------------------------
11) Exceptionally wide crew weight range ; one design cass races wil be sailed at the 250 lb.s crew weight. Speed runs will be able to be made with lower crew weight as long as RM is addressed.
----------------------------------------------
12) Wand controlled altitude with height adjustment. Set it and forget it or tweak it. Unique averaging wand system to improve choppy water response including fore and aft foil interconnect and wand bypass for smoother flying and better jumps.
----------------------------------------
Jumping is an important part of this foiler design because we think it will add to the value of the boat and to the fun of flying this foiler.
__________________
Doug Lord

foilman24

08-22-2008, 07:30 PM

Jumping is an important part of this foiler design because we think it will add to the value of the boat and to the fun of flying this foiler.

this is the dumbest thing ever. And look, now doug has once again turned someone else's thread into a billboard for the "Doug Lord retard machine"

no one wants to hear your tired song and dance, this foiler is a cool idea, why do you take it upon yourself to constantly push your own lameness onto this project (and every one else's threads) ? I have an idea, why don't you start a thread about the "Retard Machine" and see if it gets even close to the response that this Sr-71 has? (oh ya, because nobody cares and you are maybe the most loathed personality in the wide world of sailing).

by the way, you might want to check out SA, looks like your tiller twist control is a big hit. :P

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 07:37 PM

WOW............I'm tired of playing ref on this thread, and I would maybe try to stop everyone from derailing it, but its getting so funny :D . The best part it that the design has already been completed, the plans have been sent to the CNC, and construction has already started, I'm not changing a thing......ha ha ha ha ha ha (sinister laugh). :P :P :P :P :P :P :P

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 07:54 PM

Doug.

I have an idea, I plan on having my boat finished about the beginning of June (give or take) I also hope to make a trip to the Gorge in August, I propose that I build my boat as its designed right now, and you build your boat as its designed right now, and we race..........in the Gorge, in August, during the Moth world champs, 5 race series, ( I won't even use my podded training wheels because they are against the rules for the SR-71 class). what do you say?

Doug Lord

08-22-2008, 07:59 PM

The boat I'm building is a bit different than the one in the pictures and sketches but I'll race you in sunny Florida!

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 08:08 PM

what, not at the gorge during the biggest monofoiler event in the world? This is your chance to prove all your pet theories in front of the whole foiling community. It would give you something "real" to hype, I would think you would jump at the chance. :D

Doug Lord

08-22-2008, 08:14 PM

Think so,huh.....
------------
PS-did you say "pet theories"?! Interesting.

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 08:34 PM

did you say "pet theories"?

just trying to gode you into coming out to race..:D , (only ones i don't agree with are gantry, midships wand, and skipper controlled main foil, build a boat that proves your points and I might buy in).

Doug Lord

08-22-2008, 08:41 PM

It would be an excellent venue without a doubt but it may be too little time to get debugged and skilled up-and for me- too much money(probably). But we'll see....

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 08:52 PM

The boat I'm building is a bit different than the one in the pictures and sketches but I'll race you in sunny Florida!

I go to St. Simons Island, GA to visit family a couple times a year, I don't think I would make a special trip, but I'm sure something could be arranged if I was in the area and had my boat with me.

foilman24

08-22-2008, 08:59 PM

Why he can't just be like you and Bistros and design it, build it, and sail it continues to be a mystery to all

My guess is because he can't design (as you pointed out), can't build, (have you seen the aeroturd?) and probably can't sail very well either, (which is probably why he won't race wind apparent).

Chris Ostlind

08-22-2008, 09:14 PM

... but I'll race you in sunny Florida!

Since when?

Doug as meteorologist... 0

TS Fay....................... 9 million inches and counting

Chris Ostlind

08-22-2008, 09:20 PM

... but it may be too little time to get debugged and skilled up-and for me- too much money(probably). But we'll see....

So, have a Wii style race where the most potent boat is the one where the owner talks the most, gestures the most... and all without a foiling hull in sight.

I'll take 20-1 odds on Lord, right now. ;-)

foilman24

08-22-2008, 09:24 PM

So, have a Wii style race where the most potent boat is the one where the owner talks the most, gestures the most... and all without a foiling hull in sight.

spot on, except I will be in the Gorge, and I will be foiling. ;) (on my moth ha ha)

Paul B

08-22-2008, 09:27 PM

Paul B-you are a crude son of a bitch!

Now that's not a nice thing to say about my mother. If she wasn't already worm food she might just stop by and box your ears.

I could reply with reference to the chorus of the great Misfits song WHERE EAGLES DARE, but a lump like you would never get it.

Too bad, a handful of ritalin, some Misfits cranked to 11, and a pair of Doc Martens to march around your room in might have normalized you a bit.

But seriously, back to design, how is it a "designer" such as yourself can't do his own drawings?

The design incorporates MANY things just now coming to the fore in monofoiler design including buoyancy pods(before the M4), adjustable angle of incidence main foil(before John Ilett),unstayed mast before everybody on a foiler.

Wow, looky how smart your are. Somehow, with all that brain power you still couldn't get your "foiler" to foil, and your next project remains a pile of scrap after how many years?

Want to impress the world? Do what WA is doing, design something yourself, listen to input from outsiders, rake through the opinions until it makes sense to you, then build it and sail it.

We all know that will never happen.

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 09:29 PM

spot on, except I will be in the Gorge, and I will be foiling.

So will I. (If my wife lets me :rolleyes:)

funny how fast this place destabilised as soon as SA went offline...

bistros

08-22-2008, 09:36 PM

There is just no point in administering playground justice to Doug. All it does is get him riled up and then we see twice as much re-posting and old photos accompanied by capital letters and personal attacks.

Wind Apparent has got a lot of work in front of him, and at this point he doesn't need the distraction. I'm sure he'll post questions when he encounters issues - like he did asking about pre-drilling the corecell foam. I hope we can keep this on topic, because I'm learning a lot from the experience. I've not vacuum bagged a build, and this is a great opportunity for me to learn a lot about an essential skill from someone in the same shoes as I.

Doug, best of luck with your build. I hope you too can start a thread about your build, and share the process with everyone. Although at times it may seem you against the world, you could quickly turn the situation around by being one of the people here that asks for help and receives advice. Nothing will gain respect more than pictures of progress - even failures and crash & burns. It really doesn't matter whether your foiler actually meets every objective, or if it even flies. What matters is trying.

Sam has done a great job trying to keep interpersonal issues off the table here - I've deleted a post that would have caused another round of crap just yesterday. Let's respect the forum and Sam's wishes.

Cheers,

Bill
(I'm sailing tomorrow afternoon - hope there is wind!)

Chris Ostlind

08-22-2008, 09:42 PM

... I will be in the Gorge, and I will be foiling.

Me too, except I will be premiering my new foiling Tevas. Yes, folks, it can now be said out loud. The reason that I've been so quiet of late is that I have been hard at work in the shop developing my new foiling Karnali Raptor Teva watershoes.

A nicely matched pair of foils have been bonded into the manmade materials of the radical self-draining soles and with a perfectly sized rig, I can successfully foil with total convulsive impunity.

You guys worry about wands, midship huzzahs and gantrys all you want. Due to the magic of the human brain, I can keep my foils running at the perfect attitude no matter the wave slope, direction of travel or conditions present.

My lift-off speed is .5 knots (lower when I get into better shape) and right now, top speed is classified under a Proto-Cosmic clearance on a need to know basis, and you guessed it....

I will reveal that I have recently added a vestigial hull form that trails in my near wakeless operating condition to qualify me as a sailing watercraft. Not saying how big or how far aft it trails, but it is there. Another little bit and I'm afraid I'll have to shut this thing down...

The trailing vestige has a distinctly unique performance capacity.

Sorry to Sam for the temporary hijack, which up until recently was a nearly flawless thread.

Signing out from the Hi-Tech studios of Lunada Design.

wind_apparent

08-22-2008, 09:51 PM

Sorry to Sam for the temporary hijack, which up until recently was a nearly flawless thread.

I knew Sailing anarchy would screw me, who would have known it would be by going offline for a couple of days sending people to my thread to act like 5th graders. (but it has been great fun, and I see it going back to boat building as usual in the near future)

Chris, can I get a pair of your foiling teva's (10.5 + gantry, or if your going for a longer no gantry design I'll take an 11) :D

****It seems like SA's server is working again, see you all there. :p

Paul B

08-22-2008, 11:09 PM

The boat I'm building is a bit different than the one in the pictures and sketches but I'll race you in sunny Florida!

Just like you were going to have a foiling 20 foot sportboat available to race and beat a modified 18 footer 4 or 5 years ago?

Time to pony up people. I will put up $100.00 US hard cash (yes, worthless around the world) against the first person who will take the Doug Lord vs WA in the following contest:

First person to complete their foiler design/build and prove they can foil on it for 200 meters without dropping back off.

I've never met either person, I'm taking WA, and I will immediately send my money to a 3rd party to hold if anyone takes this challenge within the next week.

foilman24

08-23-2008, 09:45 AM

This could get interesting. good luck finding someone that dumb. :D (i think you might want to stipulate the boat being full size and sailed by the builder, so No models, and no ringer helms.)

Doug Halsey

08-23-2008, 12:24 PM

Doug,

Since we're already way off topic, I can't resist pointing out that the "bouyancy pods" on your monofoiler have more volume than the amas on my trimaran.

wind_apparent

08-23-2008, 03:18 PM

THE BOAT :D

So I've been fairly productive here on the computer today, spent the morning making the Sr-71 blog, so here it is, (so you can all stop PMing me asking when its going online :p) it's not anything you haven't seen before but stop by and have a look. Feel free to subscribe. It would be great to see my Boatdesign.net friends on there every once in a while ;). I will still be posting here on my thread so I can still get some "Interaction", but thought it would be good to have a proper blog as well. (it will be a lot easier to keep on topic :p )

http://sr-71monofoilerproject.blogspot.com/

Doug Lord

08-23-2008, 04:09 PM

Doug,

Since we're already way off topic, I can't resist pointing out that the "bouyancy pods" on your monofoiler have more volume than the amas on my trimaran.
Really? Doesn't look like it to me. But those pods are bigger than the final version though the beauty of removable pods is that they
can be changed to any volume that does the job for the individual skipper.
Also:"5) Buoyancy pods approx 1.56 cu' per side; larger optional pods available for training.(see approx 3 cu. ft. pods illustrated in the sketches in post #15)"

------
Great blog Sam!

Kotaro Horiuchi's bi-foiler: (multihull version)

Paul B

08-24-2008, 10:23 PM

This could get interesting. good luck finding someone that dumb. :D (i think you might want to stipulate the boat being full size and sailed by the builder, so No models, and no ringer helms.)

I doubt anyone will jump in, especially considering the **** **** himself has not, even though he has been on the site again posting photos of a boat he didn't design. I guess that means we won't see his pile-o'-parts assembled and foiling before next summer. I would guess it will be a LOT longer than that.

I would have bet $10K on this, but some smart guy would have taken it on himself to actually design and build the thing for ******, then with a few weeks to coach him (hopefully it wouldn't take longer than that) on how to sail the thing the smart guy would have his own foiler paid for with my wager.

wind_apparent

08-26-2008, 09:56 PM

Well, I finally got around to working on something today. During my lunch break I found some time to get over to our woodshop to finish cutting all support frames for my moulds (Thanks to Scott Murphy for all his help). I'm using a mould building technique I adapted from Bill Beaver, Its a braced and framed MDF mould with slotted L brackets on the outside to hold all the stanchions in place, and a T bracket strongback to hold them down the middle), I hope to get those glued up tomorrow, and who knows, maybe have pics. As far as hull construction goes, I'm making a ply skinned male mould that I can vac press to. I also have a foredeck mould and a deck mould in the works. Can't wait to get back to it, See you tomorrow...... (I might have some foil pics as well, I'm thinking of just using some standard foils from Ardvarkracing, Mike is suppose to send some pics of the new foils he's building, if he does I'll post em)

Doug Lord

08-27-2008, 07:16 AM

Would they be the standard Moth foils he makes? If so not a good idea. Any way he can increase the area?

wind_apparent

08-27-2008, 08:41 AM

Mike is sending me the pics of the new moth foils, then if I like the build quality I was hoping to discuss with him the possibility of designing some for me based off them but with a larger lift area for this project. Then I would just take the drawings and make my own mold to build some here at home.

Moth
MAIN = .1m2
RUDDER = .75m2

I want to see what he thinks would be a good extra amount to add given his design specs.

we'll see what they look like.

Doug Lord

08-27-2008, 09:01 AM

Good plan.

Doug Lord

08-27-2008, 09:56 AM

A) Based on a vealmoth(66+154=220lb.all up):
1) moth mainfoil area you posted=1.076 sq.ft.. Foil loading (at 220 X .8=176lb)
with the main foil supporting 80% of the load=(176/1.076)=163.6lb per sq. ft..
2) early Ilett foil that I have=1.19 sq.ft.. Foil loading@ 80%=147.9 lb. per sq. ft.
--------------------------
B) Your boat (90lb ready to sail+ 190 crew=280lb ):
1) Foil area based on 163.6lb Moth loading:280 X .8=224; 224/163.6=1.35 sq.ft. mainfoil area.
2) Foil area based on 147.9lb Moth(Ilett) loading: 224/147.9=1.51 sq. ft. main foil area.
=============== ========
I'd suggest trying to get the exact Bladerider and Prowler Zero foil areas and go with the one with lower loading and convert to your weight as above. Maybe Bora would help with that.
--------------------------------------
As per my PM read this-you WILL get a kick out of it: This is from the Aussie Moth forum under "hydrofoils", page 2 "hydrofoil options". Same bs.
http://www.moth.asn.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=340
-------------
Famous Phil S quote: "So I see the proposed 50kg narrow International Canoe without foils as the best option for those people who are too big to race a foiling moth. Foils would not work well enough in a wide range of winds." yeah,right!

wind_apparent

08-27-2008, 10:43 AM

yup, about the same number I came up with, but I used 185 skipper weight, (actually 1.3594 but after rounding its pretty much the same)

I will ask Bora, but I don't know, when I asked him about midship wands a while ago he just laughed at me. :D

Doug Lord

08-27-2008, 10:50 AM

For Gods sake don't even consider a midship wand wand! That is just a ridiculous fantasy some non-foiler dreamed up while out of his head-its pure rubbish-ask SimonN, Phil S and many other champions of the highest tech in the Moth class.
In fact, I bet "Paul B" could tell you how terrible such a wand is. Or maybe Bistros,or Chris Ostlind,or........

bistros

08-27-2008, 10:52 AM

we'll see what they look like.

I'm betting they look like a couple upside down capital letter T's. Some people use an upside down lower case "t" for the rudder foil.

Increasing the font size of your "T's" provides more lift for your foiler!

Doug:

I've indicated clearly in this thread that Wind Apparent should research his own control systems, and make his own informed decisions. I pointed out that the largest body of evidence to date indicated a bow wand may possibly be of benefit. I also clearly indicated the technology was in it's infancy and other options may prove to be of value. If you were objective you would take the same position, unless you were prepared to create a test environment, run sufficient experiments to collect a body of evidence and prove or disprove your theories.

Certainly, the largest collection of data and testing to date has been done by Fastacraft and Bladerider - not only experimental testing, but volume production use of the wands in racing environments up to and including Worlds level. If you wished to truly contest their conclusions, you should build/buy a Moth, configure it with a wand of your design, and race it competitively over a couple seasons. If you are right the truth will be known. I have no dogs in this hunt, so I'd be just as happy if your theories were proven right and everyone else wrong.

wind_apparent

08-27-2008, 11:14 AM

I'm betting they look like a couple upside down capital letter T's

:D I meant the sweep and shape of the lifting foil. tips etc.

bistros

08-27-2008, 11:15 AM

:D I meant the sweep and shape of the lifting foil. tips etc.

Italics & serif versus sans serif. I get it!

wind_apparent

08-27-2008, 11:17 AM

For Gods sake don't even consider a midship wand wand!

Don't worry, I won't (unless I do :rolleyes: )

Doug Lord

08-27-2008, 11:31 AM

.....to collect a body of evidence and prove or disprove your theories.

Certainly, the largest collection of data and testing to date has been done by Fastacraft and Bladerider - not only experimental testing, but volume production use of the wands in racing environments up to and including Worlds level.
====================
Gosh, Bistros but " the largest collection of data and testing to date has been done by" Dr. Sam Bradfield and his team. Bradfield invented the modern wand ( which is a midship wand,by the way) and has almost 20 years of data on production and experimental boats. He is also a friend of mine and taught me a whole lot about foils, wands, foil placement, foil sections etc. A great foiler pioneer!

Chris Ostlind

08-27-2008, 11:47 AM

... In fact, I bet "Paul B" could tell you how terrible such a wand is. Or maybe Bistros,or Chris Ostlind,or........

Thank you for the PR puff, Doug. I just love being inflated via my midship wand. ;-)

bistros

08-27-2008, 06:56 PM

====================
Gosh, Bistros but " the largest collection of data and testing to date has been done by" Dr. Sam Bradfield and his team. Bradfield invented the modern wand ( which is a midship wand,by the way) and has almost 20 years of data on production and experimental boats. He is also a friend of mine and taught me a whole lot about foils, wands, foil placement, foil sections etc. A great foiler pioneer!

Serious props to Dr. Bradfield regarding his pioneering work. I'm glad you have a friend & mentor as well. I'm sure you learned a lot about the state of the art during the tenure of his research. It would be interesting to have Dr. Bradfield (himself, not through anyone else's words) discuss the CURRENT state of the art, after he became familiar with the foiling boats of today. Time passes, and cumulative experimentation & refinement over time changes the baseline state of the art.

Regarding data collected, more sail powered foiling has been done in the last two years than all time before. Hundreds of foilers, racking up thousands of hours time have been on the water. Dr. Bradfield would have to been sailing 24x7x365 continuously for years to come close. Bora Gulari and Andrew McDougall spent many days tuning wands and trying different wand mechanisms prior to the past Moth worlds.

Doug Lord

08-27-2008, 07:33 PM

Regarding data collected, more sail powered foiling has been done in the last two years than all time before. Hundreds of foilers, racking up thousands of hours time have been on the water. Dr. Bradfield would have to been sailing 24x7x365 continuously for years to come close. Bora Gulari and Andrew McDougall spent many days tuning wands and trying different wand mechanisms prior to the past Moth worlds.
-----------------------------
Bradfield has built countless boats over his time as a foiling pioneer in addition to holding two world foiling speed records. He and his team DID spend 24x7x365 for over 20 years prior to 1990! How you could possibly think anybody alive has more hours testing/sailing than Bradfield and his team is beyond me. You quite obviously don't know what you're talking about. Bradfield improved a nearly 20 year old system designed by Philip Hansford and developed it for more than 10 years.
Keep in mind that Ilett copied Bradfields system and moved it to the bow with very little testing before selling boats with it. John felt ,at the time, that he had made an improvement to Bradfields system but freely admitted he had copied it. Then AMAC copied Ilett !
Some important details John missed- like the rigid planing wand and the REASON for its position.
Curved,midship,planing wand:

Chris Ostlind

08-27-2008, 08:10 PM

... How you could possibly think anybody alive has more hours testing/sailing than Bradfield and his team is beyond me. You quite obviously don't know what you're talking about....

Doug, take a deep breath for a minute and look at some of the numbers with which you seem to disagree.

Let's just say that there are some 300 foiling Moth-like boats out there in boatdom and that they have been out there for something like two years now.

Next, let's just say that the owners of these 300 boats are putting in, conservatively, something like 3 hours a week on the water, sailing fiddling and otherwise accumulating a vast body of collective knowledge regarding that type of foiling machine.

So, it goes something like this:

300 boats
150 sailing hours per annum
45,000 testing hours per year times two years = 90,000 hours of accumulated testing/sailing

You have indicated in this most recent post that Dr. Sam was going at it 24/7 for 20 years. I’ll bet that the only thing that Dr. Sam was doing for 24/7 during that period was breathing and experiencing peristaltic movements. For one thing, that is impossible, both physically, as well as in any realistic scheduling manner.

I get that you are just bubbling on all this. I also get that you are somewhat prone to extreme levels of exaggeration in order to prove your point and to also protect the good Doc in any way you can, but Doug... seriously, it did not happen like that, and you know it.

Not even NASA, in their all-out binge to get a dude on the moon went at it 24/7 and that was entirely funded as a priority project from the guts of the US government.

You simply have to get a grip, my man.

Now, once the Dr. Sam thing is returned to something like a believable ratio of hours spent, compared to hours physically available for any given time period, we can get to something like a good idea as to how all this testing stuff pans out. You can do the numbers if you like, but absolutely nobody with anything like a savvy understanding of how research projects are funded, as well as manned-up, will ever agree with you.

And then there's this problem... In the past, you've gone out of your way to fizz about how the whole Moth sales thing was just going through the roof with geometric sales numbers and that it was a revolution that was only just beginning. Yet, now you wish to discount the numbers of Moth sailors, who are also inadvertent testing monkeys, simply because the boat type is so new, virtually.

So, my man.... which is it? Is the Moth foiling explosion just really so much more sedate than you have previously indicated, or is the expression about the good Doctor just a wee bit overly enthusiastic in its expression? Unfortunately, on this particular set of parameters, you just don't get it both ways.

If you wish to insist that the Dr. Sam bit is truthful, then it becomes incumbent upon you to produce an unequivocally documented statement from the Doc as to what really went down.

So, we are back to you producing a set of proofs for wildly extravagant claims, which you have made in support of your overly exuberant fizzing.

And while you are at it, could you also produce the proofs for your foiling claims, with regards to that last boat you built? A set of high res digital images would do nicely as would a really crisp video clip with absolutely bulletproof veracity.

We all look forward to your developing interest in the form of supporting your claims as stated.

Chris

Paul B

08-27-2008, 08:16 PM

-----------------------------
Bradfield has built countless boats over his time as a foiling pioneer in addition to holding two world foiling speed records. He and his team DID spend 24x7x365 for over 20 years prior to 1990! How you could possibly think anybody alive has more hours testing/sailing than Bradfield and his team is beyond me. You quite obviously don't know what you're talking about. Bradfield improved a nearly 20 year old system designed by Philip Hansford and developed it for more than 10 years.
Keep in mind that Ilett copied Bradfields system and moved it to the bow with very little testing before selling boats with it. John felt ,at the time, that he had made an improvement to Bradfields system but freely admitted he had copied it. Then AMAC copied Ilett !
Some important details John missed- like the rigid planing wand and the REASON for its position.

Good to hear you are still claiming to know more than people like Illet and AMac. If there has ever been any doubt about your lack of sanity this removes it.

Here's a hint: You are not Bradfield. While he may have had some success you have not. Your miserable attempt at a foiler did not fly. You continue to glom on to other people's projects, even when they don't want you claiming association. You claim others work as your own. You are an embarassment.

I believe you will go to your grave still yapping about your pile-o'-parts that will never be assembled, let alone get up on foils, let alone jump/re-enter successfully.

The only thing you are going to be remembered for is being the biggest kook ever on sailing bulletin boards. I guess that is something.

foilman24

08-27-2008, 08:59 PM

The only thing you are going to be remembered for is being the biggest kook ever on sailing bulletin boards.

Don't forget this little nugget. :D (the moto grip flap control, with instructions on how to build it, we should be seeing them on everything soon)

Totally Awesome, Can you guys imagine what it must be like to sit at the helm of the "non-foiling turd-scow", you know, cruzin along at a blistering 5 knots, pull on the turbo lever, and feel the boat shutter beneath you as it slowly, slowly, slowly, starts going even slower because the flap is causing a ton of drag but not enough lift for the 3500 pound "turd-scow" to get out of the water,
What a rush. :rolleyes:

Wa is lucky that his boat project cool enough that even your participation doesn't seem to keep it from being one of the hottest topics on this forum.

Paul B

08-27-2008, 09:51 PM

Don't forget this little nugget. :D (the moto grip flap control, with instructions on how to build it, we should be seeing them on everything soon)
.

I would have to give style points if he had used these:

wind_apparent

08-27-2008, 11:36 PM

if you used the lock on version it would be even sweeter :D (get the lizard skins, they are better than those ODI branded ones)

wind_apparent

08-27-2008, 11:41 PM

So, was very busy today, so busy I couldn't get any boat construction "stuff" done. That's not to say nothing "boat related" happened. While "hanging" with my coworkers I came to the realization that I work with all the people that I would need for the perfect build team. I know a form/press builder (Shop foreman Scott Murphy), A crack mathematics/computer/electronics wiz (James Lindblom), a PR guy (Jacob Duncan), topnotch craftsman/finisher/daredevil (Cliff "Big Daddy" Wege), and a mad Russian vacuum bag/lamination specialist (Dmitri Panfilov). After some persuasion, each agreed to join my hydrofoil build team, which is good, because there is a ton of work, and every job will be overseen by a specialist as apposed to hacked by me (and I was going to get them to help anyway). We'll see how it works out, I know the boat will be better for it. Now that we have a PR guy, we can even start looking for a project sponsor.

I did get the numbers from Mike over at Aardvark, unfortunately the foils aren't big enough to lift this boat at a reasonable wind speed, so I'm going to have to go the homebuild route after all, oh well, whats the fun in buying pre-built stuff anyway?

Maybe I'll get some work done tomorrow.

Sam

Paul B

08-28-2008, 01:06 AM

if you used the lock on version it would be even sweeter :D (get the lizard skins, they are better than those ODI branded ones)

I'm too old school for lock ons.

I have been a Yeti guy for 20+ years, starting with an ex-race team CroMo PRO FRO in the '80s. I'm on my third frameset, a classic ARC LT (the last one made). Anything Yeti gets style points from me.

Being from Boulder you must feel the same, although in my mind Yeti is a SoCal brand from the original John Parker days.

Great bikes. If only Specialized hadn't had that freak Ned Overend riding for them Yeti (Tomac!) would have won quite a few more races.

Doug Lord

08-28-2008, 03:38 AM

.

I did get the numbers from Mike over at Aardvark, unfortunately the foils aren't big enough to lift this boat at a reasonable wind speed, so I'm going to have to go the homebuild route after all, oh well, whats the fun in buying pre-built stuff anyway?

Maybe I'll get some work done tomorrow.

Sam
---------------------------------
Have you thought of contacting Phil at Phils foils? He may be perfectly setup to do a set of foils to your exact design w/o too much cost. Design them,send to him and thats it-while you build the hull.

wind_apparent

08-28-2008, 09:32 AM

I have been a Yeti guy for 20+ years, starting with an ex-race team CroMo PRO FRO in the '80s. I'm on my third frameset, a classic ARC LT (the last one made). Anything Yeti gets style points from me.

I rode an 06' ASX for a couple seasons, then I got sick of hurting myself jumping off of things, so I recently switched back to just cruzing my transition hardtail.

Paul B

08-28-2008, 11:02 AM

I rode an 06' ASX for a couple seasons, then I got sick of hurting myself jumping off of things, so I recently switched back to just cruzing my transition hardtail.

I know what you are talking about, the healing part gets tougher as the years rip by. Mountian biking has given me a lot of pleasure over the years, but it has also provided a fractured wrist, bruised ribs, a torn rotator cuff, dislocated thumb, interesting gouges, tears, and road rashes, etc, etc.

Aren't you afraid of hurting yourself when you are "jumping" your new foiler?

You are setting it up for JUMPING, aren't you? Isn't that the only reason to build a foiler?

By the way, it sounds very cool that you have expertise in so many critical build disciplines right at your fingertips. Sounds like things should go pretty smoothly, or as smoothly as a custom build can go.

wind_apparent

08-28-2008, 12:01 PM

Aren't you afraid of hurting yourself when you are "jumping" your new foiler?

Um, believe it or not, no, I hope to never jump it (thats what windsurfers are for), But I am afraid of crashing it and smashing into the stays. (so much so that I'm putting plumbing foam on them and wearing my dirt lid helmet untill I get the hang of it, maybe my shin guards, knee pads, and chest protector too). Maybe I should just start talking to RaceFace about making a line of "freesail" body armor for crazy trapfoiler sailors. :D

Doug Lord

08-28-2008, 12:33 PM

Then again, of course, you could always go with an unstayed mast...(Van Dusen)

Paul B

08-28-2008, 12:41 PM

Um, believe it or not, no, I hope to never jump it (thats what windsurfers are for), But I am afraid of crashing it and smashing into the stays. (so much so that I'm putting plumbing foam on them and wearing my dirt lid helmet untill I get the hang of it, maybe my shin guards, knee pads, and chest protector too). Maybe I should just start talking to RaceFace about making a line of "freesail" body armor for crazy trapfoiler sailors. :D

Maybe you should talk to O'Neil and have them build you a Michelin Man springsuit (TM). The market for Trapfoilers (TM) must be HUGE. I'm taking out a patent today on mono-bi-foilers with trapeze and foam pads on the rigging. I'll send you an invoice when you infringe.

No JUMPING? Blasphemy!

I paid my way through uni by working at a boat dealership. We sold Hobies, among other things. Every buyer received free lessons, so I spent a lot of time on the water during those years.

One thing we liked to do was take the "advanced" students (more than 2 hours of sailing) and their new boats out in big breeze during a big south swell. Off of one of the offshore oil platforms there was an area that would break under those conditions.

You could rip along on a reach until you got to the wave, then head up just a bit and "fly". Actually only about half the boat would come out of the water, but it felt like full flight. There were times when the speed and swell came together just right (wrong?) and most or all of the boat would release. Not having aero pitch control at that point produced very unhappy results. The shrouds left a lasting, er, "impression".

No doubt it will be easier on your boat, perched atop two foils, compared to a very stable beach cat.

wind_apparent

08-28-2008, 03:10 PM

Then again, of course, you could always go with an unstayed mast...(Van Dusen)

the only boats I've ever sailed with unstayed mast is laser, sunfish, and opti. So
I don't know that much about them.....I think mirabaud is unstayed, but I don't know how they work, care to share?

bistros

08-28-2008, 03:23 PM

the only boats I've ever sailed with unstayed mast is laser, sunfish, and opti. So
I don't know that much about them.....I know mirabaud is unstayed, but I don't know how they work, care to share?

I don't know if you want to be the guy sailing the ....

Stayfree Maxi Foiler! ... with wings!

wind_apparent

08-28-2008, 03:29 PM

I don't know if you want to be the guy sailing the ....

Stayfree Maxi Foiler! ... with wings!

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

If they want to sponsor me I would. ;)

Doug Lord

08-28-2008, 03:39 PM

After much searching I think I found an ideal builder: Ted Van Dusen,Van Dusen Racing sailboats. For a 215 sq.ft main the mast would be 28' and about 40 lbs. and $2800;shipping adds about $300(2 weeks ago).
A guesstimate on your boat would be around 18lb's and $1800 depending whether you go with high modulus or not. E-mail Ted if you're seriously interested and know the "bury" dimension: how far from the deck or upper mast step support to the bottom of the mast step. That should be as close to the bottom as possible. Need to be able to show him a sail plan, mast length and max RM. My mast step will be a rectangular box allowing for rake changes and small F&A movement.

http://www.vandusenracingboats.com/
----------------------
edit: Mirabaud is not unstayed
heres a pix of a van dusen stick on a monoslug

wind_apparent

08-28-2008, 03:54 PM

Maybe next time.....................

wind_apparent

08-28-2008, 04:24 PM

I didn't know for sure that mirabaud had an unstayed rig, I just read it on the internet somewhere, I guess thats what I get for not doing my research.

Chris Ostlind

08-29-2008, 04:59 PM

heres a pix of a van dusen stick on a monoslug

Monoslug?!!

Doug, are you saying that all monohulls are slugs now? Am I detecting a quantum shift in the red layer in your thinking? And here I thought you defined monoslugs as all the boats in the single hulled category. Well, save for the rare Maxi-Pad with a canting keel? No wings unless you count that ugly-ass thing in blue from England and that dunce cap effort from Kiwi land in the '88 AC. Those were definitely Maxi-Pads with Wings.

Are all the Melges Sportboats monoslugs?

Are the Antrim Sportboats monoslugs? (and Paul don't start another harangue of yours or I'll wack your privates with a ruler ;-) )

Come on Doug, we really need something like a consistent take from you, or the whole boating ideology that I have brewed together just goes BLEWEY!

Your buddy,

Chris

PS: This monofoiler thing is just taking so long that the inevitable sidebars are going to develop....... tongue now removed from cheek

Doug Lord

08-29-2008, 06:53 PM

Mr. Ostlind ,monoslug was meant to be humorous. I'll refrain from using the term most of the time.

Chris Ostlind

08-29-2008, 06:57 PM

Yeah, Doug, I got that. It's just a little bit of fun making with no real harm intended.

I do think you have some interesting ideas to offer to Sam and I know that some of the stuff you've put up has given him a reason to think a bit harder on his solutions.

Chris

wind_apparent

08-29-2008, 08:13 PM

This monofoiler thing is just taking so long that the inevitable sidebars are going to develop.

Chris is this directed at me?

I do think you have some interesting ideas to offer to Sam and I know that some of the stuff you've put up has given him a reason to think a bit harder on his solutions.

this is true, but I always weigh any new piece of data, no matter what the source. If it's better than what I have, I change my mind, Dogma has no place in development. Like I've said before, conflict is the prerequisite for growth.

Doug Lord

08-29-2008, 08:22 PM

What don't you like about unstayed masts or specifically what don't you like about using one on your boat?

wind_apparent

08-29-2008, 08:44 PM

What don't you like about unstayed masts or specifically what don't you like about using one on your boat?

The fact that its an unknown is the biggest drawback, right now this project has so many unknowns I don't feel the need to add one more. You have a history with unstayed rigs from you past project, I do not, I'm not saying that they are a bad idea or that it wouldn't be a good add, I'm just saying, maybe next time, because I don't really need to be adding yet one more thing to my plate. I'll see how it works on your project, then maybe see if its worth looking into, just you saying it is isn't enough of a reason for me.

Right now I plan to use a contender mast, (the same one Marcus Hamilton (AUS2323) just used to win the worlds), It has a known flex, I know where I'm going to put the stays and the proder, I know it can handle the sail area (about the same as the contender), I know it can handle the trap. If I break one I can get another just like it in a week, I won't have to spend a bunch more time with a big redesign of my mast step area. Really, I don't see it being that big of an upgrade on this proto boat, I can only think of two plus's (not smacking the stays with my face, maybe less windage,) and a bunch of minuses (everything I wrote above).

so develop it, make it work, then maybe I'll steal the idea from you. :D

Sam

Paul B

08-29-2008, 10:32 PM

Are the Antrim Sportboats monoslugs? (and Paul don't start another harangue of yours or I'll wack your privates with a ruler ;-) )

Never sacked up to make that call and ask those two simple questions, eh?

Paul B

08-29-2008, 10:39 PM

Mr. Ostlind ,monoslug was meant to be humorous. I'll refrain from using the term most of the time.

This post is a perfect microcosm of the Drug Lord's sailing presence on the internet. Two photos of foiling boats he had nothing to do with, and a photo of a model boat not foiling.

By the way Druggie, why don't you tell us all about the intellectual property rights issue with that model you keep posting photos of?

Paul B

08-29-2008, 10:47 PM

"Paul B" ,you anonomous *******: your constant use of "Drug Lord" is not only offensive but juvenile and your LYING reference to my first fullsize foiler not foiling is blatant ********. You are a complete,gutless,ignorant scumbag.

Everyone across the internet knows about your lies and tantrums. You forget the lies you tell, and that later trips you up.

Why don't you tell us about all the psychotropics you are not on.

I spent the afternnon messing about on my boat. I'll spend the next few days out sailing. You'll no doubt spend the time sitting around looking at the internet hoping someone will believe something you say. Have fun.

================================
I apologize to other forum members and particularly to Sam for the ugliness of this post. But I have tried everything I could think of except fighting back. I absolutely will not put up with this slander and outright lying regarding my name and my work. If some think this is entertaining I think you're sick-but rest assured as long as this continues so will my response. I'm sick and tired of it!

I think I can hear the feet stamping from here.

Can you list all the things you "tried" before fighting back?

By the way, I have never slandered you:

slander (harmful statement in a transitory form, especially speech) and libel[4][5] (harmful statement in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast),

Actually, I've never libeled you either. You are a world famous liar.

Chris Ostlind

08-30-2008, 01:07 AM

Never sacked up to make that call and ask those two simple questions, eh?

Paulie, my sweet and gentle boy. Take the time to look at my post once again and note, carefully, the dumb little smiley face at the end of the comment. Now, if you feel you really need to go off while fighting all your Sancho Panza battles when someone is making a very small bit of humor... why head-on, big boy and get that lance of yours up and proud. You'll be doing it all alone because nobody else gives crap.

It will be amusing, though, to see you joust alone while trying to bust Doug's nut, once again, over nothing tangible.

I never took you for a self-flaggelator, but hey, to each his own. Now where did I put that ruler...?

Chris Ostlind

08-30-2008, 01:10 AM

Chris is this directed at me?

Probably not in the way you are wondering. The reference to things taking so long is more about the numbers of posts on the thread to this point. That is also a representation of a passage of time.

I'd hardly be the guy to bump someone for taking too long getting to the shop and moving forward.

Chris

wind_apparent

08-30-2008, 09:48 AM

I'd hardly be the guy to bump someone for taking too long getting to the shop and moving forward.

Don't you worry, once winter comes I'm going to "live" in the garage. :p

Doug Lord

08-30-2008, 01:28 PM

Words of wisdom (from Steve Clark in the DC thread on DA) to consider when designing your foils-particularly when choosing foil area:
"Sailing boat designers have had to focus on down speed efficiency because that is where races are won. It is more important to go a bit faster sooner than to go a bit faster later. For example in the foiling Moths everyone is focused on being the first to foil, not necessarily who foils the fastest in force 5. Even in force 5 managing the down speed maneuvers ( tacking and maintaining/regaining foiling speed) is probably more critical than speed in the open field. "

wind_apparent

08-30-2008, 02:58 PM

I was reading that this morning, Its one of only two threads I subscribe to on SA. they where talking about spray related drag. good stuff, if it makes you feel any better, my latest rhino foil designs had an area of 1.49 sqf for the main foil. ( I also have a set in the works for high wind speed trials that are 1.36:eek: )

wind_apparent

09-01-2008, 02:34 PM

(from my blog)

Well, after working on my mould frame structures for a little while, I've decided that they aren't going to work very well, (that's what I get for trying something that's unproven). Oh well, it was only a couple of sheets of MDF, could have been worse. So I spent yesterday redrawing the deck mould structure to take old school vertical strongbacks, hope to redraw the Hull structure today to do the same. here's a pic of the new deck structure .

yachtyakka

09-01-2008, 03:25 PM

wind_apparent

09-01-2008, 03:40 PM

Good, save any changes for MK11. get on a build the puppy. trail it break it fix it sail it fly it. remember photos or it didn't happen;) ;) ;)

I'm not changing the boat, It's the moulds, if they aren't right, the hull will be off, or at least I'm going to be doing alot more sanding to get it fared just right. I'm going to have all winter to work on this puppy, can't sail around where I live till about mid-May. Call me crazy, but I think its better to get it right in the beginning then try to fix it down the road. (And I know about pix=proof, I have a camera and plan to use it. :D)

yachtyakka

09-01-2008, 04:16 PM

I'm not changing the boat, It's the moulds, if they aren't right, the hull will be off, or at least I'm going to be doing alot more sanding to get it fared just right. I'm going to have all winter to work on this puppy, can't sail around where I live till about mid-May. Call me crazy, but I think its better to get it right in the beginning then try to fix it down the road. (And I know about pix=proof, I have a camera and plan to use it. :D)

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

can't wait

You live somewhere you cant sail all year! every week!! Crazy, just as well you have the web and can watch the movies. Do you know about the RClass from NZ?

wind_apparent

09-01-2008, 05:19 PM

You live somewhere you cant sail all year! every week!! Crazy, just as well you have the web and can watch the movies. Do you know about the RClass from NZ?

Unfortunately its true, when winter comes it snows and the lakes freeze, but it gives me the opportunity to go snowboarding. And yes, Youtube sailing vids are my friend. :p (I hope to move somewhere more sailboat friendly this summer, so I have that to look forward to) I don't know anything about the "R" class, have some info or a link?

(picture from my porch, 2/14/08)

Doug Lord

09-01-2008, 08:03 PM

Sam, have you built a boat before? Are you doing it in an environmentally controlled area?

wind_apparent

09-01-2008, 08:34 PM

Doing most of it in some warehouse space at work, and some parts in my heated garage. I have a painter friend thats going to shoot it at his shop. All vacuum bagging is going to have to happen at my work space because of the altitude. (not enough atmosphere at my house, 3000ft higher than boulder). But yes I should be fine.

yachtyakka

09-02-2008, 01:23 AM

The R Class is a 12'9'' 2 person development skiff. a few guys have been developing foils for the past couple of years. The current national Champs are about to trial there latest blades.

You will find a link on my links page 4 down from the gingerbreadman

http://yachtyakka.co.nz/links/

Gary Baigent

09-02-2008, 02:13 AM

Nothing special on the skimmer in the foil department Doug, in fact very conventional - however the double rigs will be wing mast/soft sail combinations and the after rig will be inclining (to get it away from dirty air when sailing on the wind.
If I draw a version of your 16-17 foot craft, it won't have any bloody lead, just water ballast, which can be quickly taken on, or dumped - haven't worked it out how to do it yet.

Doug Lord

09-02-2008, 06:15 PM

Gary,thanks - I have a comment and a question I'll post in the foiling keelboat thread.

wind_apparent

09-02-2008, 09:02 PM

The R Class is a 12'9'' 2 person development skiff. a few guys have been developing foils for the past couple of years. The current national Champs are about to trial there latest blades.
http://yachtyakka.co.nz/links/

Looked into it, and it looks awesome, I will be nice to have a double handed foiler class out there. (one turn closer in the revolution :D )

Paul B

09-03-2008, 10:33 PM

"Paul B" ,you anonomous *******: your constant use of "**** ****" is not only offensive but juvenile and your LYING reference to my first fullsize foiler not foiling is blatant ********. You are a complete,gutless,ignorant scumbag.

While others were out sailing their boats over the holiday weekend it seems the **** **** sat at the computer again. If he had kept his "foiler" that only needed "small changes" he could have been foiling away all weekend, oh so much fun. Why on earth would you bin a perfectly good "foiler"?

Instead of foiling all weekend he sat home and and posted feverishly about:

A ridiculous idea for a fixed keel foiling dinghy.

America's Cup "Foilers".

Dragging Gary B's interesting project into the "foiling" world.

Results of a fun regatta half way around the world, contradicting the guy who won

and again tries to tell AW how to build his foiler. Here's a hint, he doesn't need you.

Sadly, the reports of AW's design and build have sent the ******* over the edge. After at least 6 years of posting foiler, foiler, canter, foiler spew across cyberspace ol' ******* still hasn't designed/built a functioning foiler.

But now AW has posted for a couple of months and has started his project in a very straighforward way that will give a good chance for success within the year. What, oh what will poor ******* do?

After not stepping up to the challenge of building his own monstrosity that would surely fail and cause him even more ridicule he goes full throttle on every other crazed notion he can think of.

"Lookit me Mommy, lookit me." he cries as the other kids congratulate AW on his logical, artistic, and "live" project.

**** *** likes to call people liars, but he can't tell anyone anything about how his prior failure "foiled". His story has changed a couple of times at least, so here's another challenge for him. Tell us the following about your "foiling" on the red paddleboard:

Times, Dates, and locations of the foiling:
Pilot Name (and weight) of the craft at the time it foiled:
Who else was present:
Duration of the foiling (time):
Height above the water (amplitude):
Speed at lift off:
Top speed:
Did you "Veal Heel":
What was the pitch at lift off:
What was the pitch while foiling:
How much change in crew position was required to make the change in pitch:
What point of sail were you foiling at:
What changes did you make just after lift off:
When it came off the foils what was the reason, and how did it come off:

You see *******, liars can't give specifics, and you've given none of the above. Some people claim your paddleboard went in the water with sails up one time, on the day you say it didn't foil due to light breeze, then went off to the side of the barn for the duration.

Care to tell us how many times it sailed, and of those times how many times did it foil? Care to tell us why you have photos of it not foiling, but none of the times it did?

I'll bet not. Liars can't give out the info that can get them caught.

wind_apparent

09-06-2008, 11:06 AM

I'm very excited to announce that Mike Cooke from Aardvark Technologies in the UK has agreed to come on as the project "Foil Development Advisor". I will be designing and building the foils and moulds myself, but Mike has agreed to help me out with all my questions and give me pointers on the process and system setup. There are so many things that are "secret" in the foiling game (control systems, flap size, wing tips, foil taper, ect.). It will be very helpful to have a master foil craftsman to take some of the voodo out of the process. I can't wait to start working with him on the design aspect of my lifting foils, and my bow mounted wand system.

Doug Lord

09-06-2008, 12:09 PM

Congratulations!

foilman24

09-06-2008, 01:53 PM

wind_apparent

09-06-2008, 02:10 PM

I was on SA digging through everyone's personal information (:D) I noticed that WA's birthday is June 18, and Doug's birthday is June 17, does that make him the "Bizzzaro Doug" :?:

(I also saw that the Mirabaud guy's birthday is June 18, do you have to be born in mid June to be a Foil freak?)

yup, you figured it out, I'm from another reality where foilers are built and sailed on actual water by humans sitting "on" the boat. :p

And as you have guessed "Thomas Jundt" is my long lost twin foiling brother who is just 20 years older than me. :confused:

wind_apparent

09-07-2008, 11:37 PM

Paul B

09-07-2008, 11:39 PM

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D

I know, I know, but what I want you to do is compare these two pictures:

they are eerily similar, but do you notice a difference? (I'll give you a hint, its not the bow wand either)

Pic #1 Doug, Pic #2 Mike Cooke

I was going to guess the bow wand. Obvioulsly the wrong choice. I know 'cause I've read it on the internet.

wind_apparent

09-07-2008, 11:41 PM

then, look at these two as well.

Paul B

09-08-2008, 12:08 AM

then, look at these two as well.

From what I read on the internet those photos are misleading.

foilman24

09-08-2008, 12:11 AM

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D

I know, I know, but what I want you to do is compare these two pictures:

they are eerily similar, but do you notice a difference? (I'll give you a hint, its not the bow wand either)

Pic #1 Doug, Pic #2 Mike Cooke

Is it that Doug is going upwind, and Mike is going downwind?

Paul B

09-08-2008, 12:31 AM

Is it that Doug is going upwind, and Mike is going downwind?

I don't believe Lard is in either photo.

I did run across this photo of a new foiler. Maybe WA can get some ideas from it. You can see how much it has started to lift off, based on the height of the waterline above the water. If only the helm would work the "Veal Heel" I'm sure they would pop right up.

It does have the right transom design for a foiler (unlike the red paddleboard), but obviously does not have the midship wand or the FU Box. If it did it might have popped up already.

foilman24

09-08-2008, 07:52 AM

I don't believe Lard is in either photo.
It does have the right transom design for a foiler (unlike the red paddleboard), but obviously does not have the midship wand or the FU Box. If it did it might have popped up already.

Just needs a gantry to help with foil separation. :D

Paul B

09-08-2008, 11:03 AM

Just needs a gantry to help with foil separation. :D

That would be ugly and look like a contraption.

wind_apparent

09-13-2008, 01:23 AM

Well, I am sick of trying to work with CNC programmers, after spending a week looking for anyone with a 4X8 vac table machine in the Boulder area that had a drafting program that could read my OSX dfx files (and finding no one) I've decided to go old school. Yes thats right. 1:1 PDF & Kinko's. I'm taking some stanchion drawings down to them, have them printed out on 36'' wide paper from their plotter, then Super 77 them to some MDF, and start getting after it. I'm going to do all the moulds for this first boat by hand. I don't care what all you smarty pants NA's out there say. All kinds of boats have been done this way (moth's, IC's, Swifts, A Cats, ect.) it will be fine. With the fantastic way the economy is going in this country, I find myself with more time than money. And I will finally be able to get to work.

Doug Lord

09-13-2008, 12:22 PM

Do you know what your SA/ws number is hullborne?
Keep the faith and start cutting! Good Luck!
=========================================
PS-just noticed that your transom station looks like it pinches in-seems like in combo with the reverse bow it might lock the hull to the "mold"? Just at the begining
of the radius it looks narrower than above the radius?

wind_apparent

09-13-2008, 02:49 PM

=========================================
PS-just noticed that your transom station looks like it pinches in-seems like in combo with the reverse bow it might lock the hull to the "mold"? Just at the begining
of the radius it looks narrower than above the radius?

It is narrower (a little sinkable stern experiment) but not much, I've seen it done before, it should be ok, the laminate should flex enough to where it won't get hung up, the bow doesn't get bound together until after its off the mould, so that should flex enough to get it off as well. thanks for the concern.

wet feet

09-13-2008, 03:54 PM

Why would OSX cause problems with dxf files?I would have to say that I would expect the parts to be seperated out rather than presented as a stack,as shown in your attached jpeg.In fact if you had them nested on eight by four sheets you would have helped considerably.Your old school methods will work admirably but a bit more slowly.I have no familiarity with the adhesive you are proposing to use to attach your plots to the MDF but would urge caution as moistening the paper can cause the paper to stretch.Drafting film is much more stable and unfortunately rather more expensive.How are you proposing to fill the gaps between the sections?

wind_apparent

09-13-2008, 04:35 PM

Its a beta version of OSX Rhino, I don't know why, but every woodshop I sent my Dfx and Dwg files to couldn't get them to open. They made Solidworks crash, Autocad would open them and they would be blank, I can open them in my Rhino for windows, but none of the shops around here have Rhino (and yes, I exported them from Rhino windows as well, nothing). It just wasn't working out. I was getting them CNC'ed to save time, and It ended up being more of a hassle. I have access to a full blown woodshop so I figure Its going to be a way for me to get through my lunch breaks (instead of surfing the internet). All my CNC drawings where nested on 4x8 sheets, just like you said, but I reconfigured them for kinko's because I'm using 3 machinable templates to get my 24 frames instead of 24 individual stanchion prints (less waist, more exact.) Here is an example of my deck frames drawing that I was sending out. It really doesn't matter to me that its going to be more work this way. A lot of the intention behind this project was for me to find something to do with myself. Something cool "I" built with my hands. This new aspect adds to that premise as apposed to taking away from it.