Veal Heel for Multihull Foilers

[Doug Lord]

One of the most recent major contributions to the physics of sailing has come
from the little Moth monofoiler: it is called "veal heel" after Rohan Veal who developed it. Nothing new about heeling a boat to windward except when that boat is flying on hydrofoils. In that case with the boat heeled to weather the Righting Moment(RM) is increased by the amount the boat and crew CG move to weather of the center of lift of the foils. Not only that but the struts(daggerboard and rudder) supporting the hydrofoils are unloaded and a component of the hydrofoil lift acts to weather improving upwind vmg.
Multifoilers,to date, have either sailed level or heeled like a "normal" sailboat.( except for an unsuccessful experiment in the C class)
I think there may be a better way on a high performance trimaran that would use very small "amas" like the Rave but with a major difference: the new boat would use two foils-like a Moth- for boat speeds up to say, 20 knots. After that the boat would deploy(retractable) very small foils from the vicinity of the windward ama that would generate downforce to increase RM.
I did a rough comparison of two boats each weighing exactly what a Rave does and the wetted surface is less at least up to 30 knots boat speed but whats more drag is less again, at least up to 30 knots. This thing could be designed to be MUCH lighter than a Rave(368lb) and could be substantially faster in 5-20 knots of wind.
But what is really cool is that the new concept foiler would sail with "veal heel" with the attendant advantages upwind.
Comments welcome.....
To see an illustration of the physics of veal heel see Fig 25 of the attached paper(from the International Moth site):
Rave pix:
Moth with veal heel:

[Paul B]

Blah, Blah, Blah, foiling, blah, blah, blah, veal, blah, blah,blah. To see an illustration of the physics of veal heel see Fig 25 of the attached paper:


Have you secured the rights to post this technical paper on this BB?

Have some respect for the intellectual rights of others.

[Doug Lord]

heres an illustration for an approximately 15' wide "tri"-stb side only:

[Cheesy]

that angle doesnt much look like 20 deg.....

[Doug Lord]

that angle doesnt much look like 20 deg.....

==============
My apologies. As usual, I got in a hurry and screwed up. The 20 degrees on the drawing made sense at the time because I was thinking of the boat heeling 20 degrees to weather and of the powerfoil strut angled 20 degrees to leeward(of vertical). Not very clear on the drawing,though.

[Chris Ostlind]

Once again, it's all about the ability to draw and one's ability to express oneself with a simple set of pencils and drafting tools. Logic is explained through a drawing.

Doug, please get yourself enrolled in a Junior College, 2D drawing, as well as architectural drafting class process and learn how to avoid this in the future.

Your ability to express yourself in the graphic medium is hurting your cause. Most folks respond a whole lot better to an illustration than they do to along list of numbers.

[schakel]

Veal heal, Heal a boat or sail to wind ward, produces an upward vector that makes the overall load on the water less.
Less wetted surface, les drag from foils, less resistance, more speed and that is where it's all about.

A a former windsurfer I do not underestimate the power of this. They had the 1 Nm worldspeedrecord until hydroptere smashed it.

http://www.sailspeedrecords.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=80&Itemid=20

[Doug Lord]

Thanks Schakel! And on a foiler it also increases RM. I'm convinced a multihull foiler could be designed to take advantage of these proven benefits.

[Paul B]

heres an illustration for an approximately 15' wide "tri"-stb side only:

And here I thought you would not be able to do worse than your last "sketches".

So this is your idea of a technical drawing? No scale, dimensions all wrong, produced with a leaky ball point pen? That is something that would not have even been graded by my high school drafting instructor. I would love to see you post a linesplan you have drawn for any of the boats you claim to have designed.

The fact that you are not ashamed to post something like that on a public forum says quite a bit about your mental state.


I guess as a designer you are a revolution. By revolution I mean someone who can't actually draw anything, and likes to take other people's calculations and scale them in a linear way in order to post thousands of words of nonsense across the internet.

[TeddyDiver]

A bit obsessed about your own opinion of your ultimate superiority compared to lower lifeforms trying to make some sense every now and then? :D

[Doug Lord]

As mentioned earlier,I did a rough comparison of two boats each weighing exactly what a Rave does and the wetted surface is less at least up to 30 knots boat speed but whats more drag is less again, at least up to 30 knots. This thing could be designed to be MUCH lighter than a Rave(368lb) and could be substantially faster in 5-20 knots of wind.
But what is really cool is that the new concept foiler would sail with "veal heel" with the attendant advantages upwind and with RM. The Power Foil system allows a lighter boat, faster boat across the wind spectrum .

Veal Heel-see fig 25 here:

[BWD]

Dude, with all due respect, you ought to stop saying, "veal heel"
I have never heard Rohan Veal say it (probably because he is not a wanker), so why should you say it?

There is another term for "veal heel."
It's equilibrium.
If no one found it before Veal, it is likely because they suck.
Or were mentally constipated from too much conventional sailing. The right heeling angle for the moth is a discovery to make in the first outing, unless you want to be swimming the whole time, and/or flailing downwind.

Anyway sorry for the digression ;)

Back to the topic,

What all those dam numbahs don't do,
is dance with the water like a real boat.

See you probably haven't realized it, but with the power foils, you have also approached your former grail, the jumpin boat.

Small foils may be DESIGNED to only provide X percent of of Y or blah blah proportion ratio RM, deployed at v velocity with SA blah blah,
but what they do is load up as hard as you load them, faster than bigger ones,
and they blow out faster too.

The idea that the adjustable sailor ass can compensate for a sudden change in RM of 30% or so is very optimistic, especially considering that the RM change from the foil blowing out or stalling is (1) nearly instantaneous and (2) not the first event in the chain leading to a crash, but the 2nd or 3rd, following an awkward weight shift, falling off a wave, a big gust, etc.
Case in point, (although in this case the foil venting likely was the first problem, see the video) see below the most famous boat yet to depend on anything like a power foil, the hi speed hydrofoil jumpin boat extraordinaire:

[Doug Lord]

Ah, "Dude", 'veal heel' is a term that is part of the lexicon of bi-foiler design. It's major advantages are relevant ONLY to bi-foilers and do not apply to any other boats except ,of course, to bi-foil multihulls designed to use Power Foils.
The advantages of veal heel on a bi-foiler:
1) produces side force from the lifting foils that can unload the vertical fin reducing the chance of ventilation. (major)
2) increases RM regardless of altitude(as long as hull structure is clear of the water).(major-very significant-approx. 20% increase in RM)
3) produces lift component from the sail that reduces foil loading.(minor)
4) shifts helmsman closer to the water decreasing the impact of his wind shadow on the sail and putting him in a slower moving portion of the wind boundary layer.(minor)
Equilibrium is NOT another term for "veal heel" though a boat being sailed with "veal heel" may be temporarily in equilibrium, particularly if it is using Power Foils....
There has NEVER been a multifoiler designed to use veal heel- it is a brand new application of the technology with tremendous benefits.
There is plenty of information around about foils being used with "negative lift"-to hold the windward side down(Rave,Hobie Trifoiler,F3). Should the windward foil "let go" on a boat like the Rave you can lose 30% or more of the total RM and still recover without any movable ballast at all.
A Power Foil equipped foiler(with wand based altitude control on each power foil set to control negative lift) would have an even better chance of recovery.
In some respects the Power Foil equipped multifoiler is similar to the Rave when the power foils are deployed but the big difference is that in light to moderate air it would be sailed like a Moth or Mirabaud using only two foils and "veal heel" upwind. The drag reduction in light and moderate air is substantial compared to the Rave in those conditions. And when the Power Foils are deployed in heavy air the resulting system has most of the advantages of the Rave system up to a designed wind strength(which might be less than or equal to a Raves designed wind strength)-with less drag.
-----
Here's what Greg Ketterman said about the windward foil adding to RM on the Hobie Trifoiler:
"Hydrofoil boats can be categorized into two categories; 1) Incidence controlled hydrofoils and 2) surface piercing hydrofoils. The difference lies in the way the boat maintains the proper altitude above the water surface. A surface piercing hydrofoil boat maintains proper height by varying the amount of foil submerged. The boat raises up as the speed increases and reduces the amount of foil submerged and therefore the lift. The boat finds equilibrium at the proper altitude. An incidence controlled hydrofoil sailboat has a mechanism that controls the angle of attack of the foil to maintain the proper altitude. It is generally believed that surface piercing is simpler, but incidence control is more efficient. In reality, it is the method that works with fewer problems that is simpler.
From the beginning it was felt that incidence control was better suited for a sailboat even though most of the existing hydrofoil sailboats were of the surface piercing type. There are many advantages of the incidence controlled foils; however, the most important is what I call the DLA (dynamic leveling affect). This is the increase in righting moment or stability due to the ability of the windward foil to pull down. The DLA has little affect on the low wind performance, but it essentially makes the top speed of the boat limited to the strength of the boat. Conventional boats with a finite amount of righting moment can only extract so much power from the wind, but with the DLA, the righting moment is virtually unlimited."

[BWD]

'veal heel'Nope. A few kooks on the net does not a lexicon make.
It is windward heel, pure and simple.
Even if some mothies themselves say otherwise.
The new technology may deserve a new name but the application of age old technique (hiking and balance) to it does not.
People have been excercising the cerebellum for millions of years.
This moth stuff is not exactly news, btw, so no need to keep re-explaining it.

Equilibrium?
Wudja mean not in equilibrium?
If not in equilibrium it would be levitating, sinking, capsizing, etc.
Trust you understand the reference frame and type of equilibrium meant.
It's all about equilibrium, in sailing as in life.


Should the windward foil "let go" on a boat like the Rave you can lose 30% or more of the total RM and still recover without any movable ballast at all. because the damn thing is so wide and heavy nobody wanted one even though it is fast.

The problem with little foils is despite designers' efforts, in reality they both load up and ventilate at inopportune times. Works for boards because the sailor or surfer is so big and mobile relative to everything else, he can rapidly unweight and reset the flow. Not so simple on a boat, have to ride it out, come off plane, off foil, etc. Sailrocket example illustrates the pitfall of relying on hydrofoil for RM.

The brilliance of the moths etc is that they don't rely on the foils for RM, but allow the sailor to literally and figuratively leverage the foils to control RM, via your favorite concept, windward heel, without adding more rococco crap to the design. On that I think we agree and it is fairly well understood. I just maintain the fewer foils and wands, the better.

But anyway, why don't you prove your power foil concept with a sailing example, good luck.
But first why not just get the bifoiler up and running if you can.
While I am no fan of your web rants, I'll definitely congratulate you if you can get that foiler to foil, on any number of foils. Get it on youtube. ;)

[Doug Lord]

You're wrong about veal heel-but so what. Veal Heel is the key to adapting Power Foils to a multifoiler.
You're understanding of what Power Foils do is suspect when you make a statement like you did about Sailrocket: it does not use foils for Righting Moment-not even a little one.
http://www.sailrocket.com/boat.htm

=========================
The reason "veal heel" is part of the lexicon of bi-foiler design is multifaceted. If you just say "windward heel" that could apply to any boat heeling to windward from a windsurfer on up. There are very specific things(see my last post) that veal heel refers to that windward heel does not cover. The specificity of the term "veel heel" sets it apart from just using "windward heel".

[bad dog]

What chance Middle East peace when humans of similar culture and persuasions exhibit so much spleen, in what should be a constructive and logical forum. Come on fellas - if you can't play nicely you can go to your rooms. And I'm not joking - let's have some respect amongst each other.

Attack the argument, disect the logic - play the ball but respect the player. These simple rules I think are written somewhere in the terms of use of this forum.

Thankyou.

Now, back to the argument...

[Doug Lord]

Mr. Dog, thanks for your comments! This stuff is mostly new, though it has a solid basis in proven design and experience. When something new is posted on almost any forum the reactions vary from curiosity to hostility-its just human nature. Some will try to "debunk" the idea,others will attack the poster, and still others will bring up reasonable well considered questions, ideas etc. Its all part of the forum experience.
But if you post a new idea you better be willing (and able) to knowledgeably express why you think it is worthwhile.
Thanks again for your willingness to try to "keep the peace"-it takes guts to do that.

[bad dog]

Terms of Use Agreement we all "signed up to" when we joined:

2.) Conduct must be conducive to sharing ideas and information
2a.) It is never acceptable to insult or attack other members. Disagreement is healthy and beneficial to intelligent discussion but should be based always on ideas and factual information and never degenerate to a personal attack or insult.

A violation of the above may lead to the immediate termination of your login and being banned from the forum permanently at the descretion of the moderator(s). More than one violation will mean the termination of your login and permanent banning from the forum without discussion. If you believe a post constitues an attack against you or other violation, you are always welcome to report this using the "report post" icon on the top right of each post .

[bad dog]

Mr Lord,

I love the forum when at its best. Like many others, I have learnt from it. I just get sad when simple manners are ignored and it devolves into a denegration session.

I appreciate as well as anyone that putting up new ideas sets you up for attack. I've done it for a living for 30 years! But it is the idea that should be attacked - if it works, it will stand. If not, it should fall. Test metal with acid.

But the person should always be respected for trying something new. Without innovation, where would we be? Actually, there is no simple answer to that question - it depends on where you place value, like is the love of a good woman - or the mateship of a good friend worth more than, as much, or less than as a fast boat? But that's probably not a relevant discussion for here!

Let's get back to the discussion about heeling...

[bad dog]

Re heeling rigs this post....

My old Catapult cat had a canting rig (discussed previously on another thread). While not truly heeling the whole boat - and therefore not getting any of the advantages of the heeled foils - it certainly proved the point about lift generated by the vertical vector in the forces.

If the rig was plumb, the lee bow had a tendency to bury when off the wind, even on a shy reach. Cant the rig 8~10° to windward, and it would visibly lift. It should be noted that rake had an even more pronounced affect when close hauled, as expected. This was all with the jib+main skiff rig, not the original cat rig. The jib definitely provided more bow lift.

The canting rig was one feature of that boat which I would definitely like to try on my A-cat. I wonder if anyone else has?

As for foilers on A-cats - that's now dead in the water after an international vote last year. Not sure it was a good move in retrospect.

Yours truly, Mr B. Dog (G. Cat)

[Chris Ostlind]

While I appreciate the lecture on decorum, BD... the fact remains that Douglas has proposed umpteen of these so-called world beating ideas over the last many years (I'll reiterate them if you like) and to this date, has not proved that a single one of them can work, much less have they the kind of grounded substance to merit a significant look-see.

This particular idea has been bandied-about for a very long period of time... long enough, actually, for Doug to have built an example of a working version at full size and yet... there is absolutely nothing on the water at this time.

Personally, I think it's a very long-odds crapshoot as to whether this Power Foil, or whatever Doug chooses to call it, will ever work in the real world. There are significant issues with its efficacy when sailing in real conditions and Doug has never successfully addressed them to this point in time.

This "idea" remains a pipe dream and shall stay that way until such time as a full size working version of this "concept" emerges as a boat that can state its own case.

Since you haven't been around for the past, what is it now, Doug... eight years, in which dozens of these same kind of oh-so-groovy, concepts, have been slammed onto these pages by Mr. Lord, only to ignominiously disappear into the wasteland of, they'll never be seeing the light of day... you wouldn't know how often we've all been subjected to this same kind of rigamaroll.

To put it succinctly... Doug wastes the provided bandwidth of our generous host in the most abusive of fashions.

If you wish to defend this process and waste your time, by all means, my man, get on board the Doug Lord train to nowhere and let us know when it reaches its destination.

We'll all still be here to receive the urgently delivered news.

[bad dog]

Chris - I appreciate that Doug may have a history of ideas yet to be proven. but it is still common courtesy to allow him the space to air ideas. Who knows - the next one may be The One. Edison and nearly every other inventor has a cupboard full of ideas that didn't work.

If your are offended by a scrappy pen drawing, you are not forced to post anything - go and have nioce capoccino somewhere, and smell the avocados on the way.

[BWD]

No, DL,
I am not wrong.
I understand how these foils work even if you don't like what I say about it.
The engineering and optimisation may be complex but the concepts are simple and well established.

The point of refering to sailrocket was to draw your attention to foil ventilation, aka "blow out" or "spin out," regardless of whether the foil is oriented to produce lift horizontally or vertically.

The blow out phenomenon is a potential achilles heal of any system that dips foils as you descibe to make RM, just as it is a concern in vessels that use foils in other configurations. The other main worry that comes to mind with the design concept you describe for power foils is the potential for higher shock loads that will happen when things get a little off kilter, particularly twisting forces.
I only mention these things in a friendly effort to be helpful.
Sorry if you don't like naysaying, but it is part of the process. When you propose new ideas, the burden's on you to demonstrate their utility and practicality.

Yes, I also was making fun of you a little bit in regard to your past descriptions of jumping boats. I see your sense of humor is lacking in this area.
Sorry if that is a sore subject, I won't dwell on it.

In addition to that little bit of teasing, I thought, and still think, you are due a bit of criticism for various neologisms, including "veal heel."

I think neologisms are usually unwarranted and all the systems and concepts discussed can be adequately and perhaps more clearly described in conventional terms.

That is all, carry on.

[Doug Lord]

Oh, now I understand. I thought the jumping boat reference was great-you'll notice I didn't mention it at all because it is going to be one of the great applications for "fun" foiling down the line. Really.
---
You said:"The problem with little foils is despite designers' efforts, in reality they both load up and ventilate at inopportune times. Works for boards because the sailor or surfer is so big and mobile relative to everything else, he can rapidly unweight and reset the flow. Not so simple on a boat, have to ride it out, come off plane, off foil, etc. Sailrocket example illustrates the pitfall of relying on hydrofoil for RM. "
Now that sounds to me like you're saying that the "..Sailrocket example illustrates the pitfall of relying on hydrofoil for RM".
Wait, that IS what you said! Now, of course, Sailrocket doesn't use hydrofoils for RM. So you seem to be saying that the vertical fins on Sailrocket illustrate the pitfalls of using hydrofoils for RM. If so, I'm sorry but that doesn't make much sense to me: the vertical foil(s) on Sailrocket operate in an ENTIRELY different way than do the vertical or horizontal foils in the Power Foil system:
1) the vertical strut in the Power Foil System develops NO LIFT and operates as a streamlined foil only. This is because,with veal heel, the function of lateral resistance is combined with the horizontal* main foil and the horizontal* Power Foil to unload the vertical fins of both the Power Foil and mainfoil.(one lifts vertically up, one lifts vertically down, EACH has a windward component that provides lateral resistance. )
2) lateral resistance on Sailrocket is provided by highly loaded vertical foils that operate right at the air/water interface and are far more likely to ventilate(catastrophic loss of lift) than any foil used on the Power Foil system.
Your example is just plain wrong, but I appreciate your comments and thoughts on the subject.
As to veal heel: I explained earlier that "veal heel" has a specific meaning not included in the term "windward heel" and that is why it is used.

---------
* nominally horizontal-operating at an ideal angle to the horizontal of approximately 20 degrees.

[BWD]

Whatever, it was just an example, not the thesis of what I had to say.
And maybe you haven't looked at sailrocket in a while. Maybe I said it because the foil is not vertical. ;)
I seem to remember having written fairly carefully but don't care to reread it all now. If you do, perhaps you should be a lawyer or paralegal.
I tried that once and it was boring.
The main foil almost certainly does play a role in RM, and it is the one that ventilated leading to lift off. So I feel it makes a fair example.
You seem concerned with RM in this thread, so that is relevant. Still the big issue is not foil orientation but what happens when it lets go. And how much fun that might be if the foil is out on a beam or ama.

We are likely not to agree on terminology. I just feel it sounds a bit dense to propose a new term for a supposedly new technique when the new technique consists entirely of sliding your rear end to windward on a dinghy. Like that has never happened before. Sure there are other technique differences in sailing foilers, but they don't really fall under the category of heel.

The difference is in the appendages configuration as discussed extensively, not the hiking technique. Or the orientiation of heel. Which is still to windward.
I guess I am just so used to it from windsurfing kiting and other sports that I take it for granted.
Windsurfers kiteboards powerboats etc do similar things, just have a different shaped lifting surface.
Why should something seen for decades in some craft get a shiny new misnomer all of a sudden when applied to a new type of boat?
Just because Veal won a few regattas, or because Doug Lord has internet?

Of course you can call it feng shui heel, Papi Ortiz Heel,
Sponge Bob Squarepants heel, or Nikita Kruschev heel if brightens your day.
Just please don't expect everyone to agree, or to be seen as some sort of authority.

Think I might start calling it JayZ heel, cause I got 99 problems but this thread aint one.
Oh and see, not so vertical:

[Doug Lord]

We are likely not to agree on terminology. I just feel it sounds a bit dense to propose a new term for a supposedly new technique when the new technique consists entirely of sliding your rear end to windward on a dinghy. Like that has never happened before.


====================
You misunderstand the significance of the physics behind veal heel-a term used by several designers of bi-foilers in addition to many foiler sailors.
It is a vast oversimplification to say "a technique that consists entirely of sliding your rear end to windward on a dinghy".
There is NO other non-foiling dinghy where the RM is increased 20% due entirely to the movement of the boat + crew CG to windward of the center of lift of the boat AFTER the crew is at max extension. The crew can start out at max hiking(or trapezing) extension and by learning the technique(first developed by Rohan Veal) he can THEN increase RM 20% by not moving himself at all(relative to the boat).The benefits of veal heel only work on a foiler that is 100% supported by foils-not on any other dinghy. As I have said twice now (and described in detail) "veal heel" describes something substantially more than windward heel- thats why the foiler guys use the term and thats why I use the term.

[bad dog]

I have done a bit of research on the web and in the Pittwater area (surely the centre of the sailing universe?), and although the Macquarie Dictionary (the most up to date and responsive dictionary in the English speaking world) does not list the term, it is commonly accepted as meaning heel to windward in a foiling vessel.

Nothing new about windward heel of course - Bethwaite mentions it at length in The Bible (no, not that one, the High Performance Sailing one) in relation to light air upwind performance. But of course, when Bethwaite wrote that worthy tome, foiling Moths were still over the horizon. As Doug and others point out above, veal heel is when you get the boat to increase its RM, not just increasing the efficiency of the rig. This is where VH is a quantum leap beyond other forms of windward heel in non-foilers.

Whether it is a neologism is irrelevant - neologisms are useful, that's why they get created: "Neologisms tend to occur more often in cultures that are changing rapidly and also in situations where there is easy and fast propagation of information." (Wikipedea). I think that foilers and multihulls fit that description pretty well!

It has also been pointed out that a field with a lot organic neologisms (ie, that have come into without artificial interference) is by definition a fast evolving filed of endeavour. IT is a classic example. So you would expect the bleeding edge of high speed sailing to be spawning a few... let the neologisms come - it proves we're kicking bottom!

[BWD]

I really don't think I misunderstand it a bit. Significance?
I guess significance is more a question of significance to whom.

It is a bit boring for the forum but for your satisfaction I will put it in simplest terms:
in discussing foilers in the roll axis we describe a lever
acted on by forces: weights of crew and vessel,
pressures of wind and water.
A fancy teeter totter you can draw force vectors around.
Simple, elegant, and a long way from a built boat.

I don't see why you object so when anyone comes along and introduces considerations
of what can go wrong with a design when built.
Shouldn't such considerations have a place in the design process, and in discussion of designs?

If your design addresses the issues brought up, why not just explain how rather than cast aspersions?

As far as the sidebar argument on terminology,
it is possible some confuse design with technique because they try to practice one
while having given up on the other.
Applies equally I guess to dumb sailors and lazy designers.

Seems clear the bifoil designs allow generation of RM,
the technique is trimming the boat with your weight,
and the heel resulting is to windward.
Yes the foils contribute to RM -because of their design. whoopee.
Perhaps mothists will become known for flabby abs.
The fact that the sailor may not have to hike as hard once the boat is at optimal trim
doesn't make it a new technique. This can be true of many boats, foiled or not.
If it's easier on the belly and goes fast that's nice, but not a new technique.
Still think veal heel is a silly gimmicky sounding term
and at least somewhat misapplied when called a technique.

I notice you've gotten a bit quiet on that sailrocket foil.
Looked around 30 degrees to me.
Foils like that are not neccessarily bad, but they aren't foolproof and seem relevant to your proposals.
Failure modes and dynamic stability problems are important to think about.
See you later, I am going to go windglide my waterskipper with JayZ heel.
So my lazy fat self doesn't have to hike so hard.

[Doug Lord]

I don't see why you object so when anyone comes along and introduces considerations
of what can go wrong with a design when built.
Shouldn't such considerations have a place in the design process, and in discussion of designs?


=======================================
Yes,absolutely. The only "objection" was to the validity of the comparision, no objection at all to any "..considerations of what can go wrong". In fact, I invite those kind of considerations-they help me to think things like this out. Your comparison, however, equated the behaviour of a foil or foils that is highly loaded AT the air/water interface with a fully submerged foil that is not near the air/water interface. That is not a valid comparision if it is used(as you appeared to be using it) to assess the viability of the Power Foil. A much more appropo comparision, for the purpose of illustrating the performance of a Power Foil, is the windward foil of a Hobie Trifoiler or Rave in strong wind conditions. Those foils are fully submerged foils that develop negative lift in strong wind conditions and rarely, if ever, become unstuck.

[Doug Lord]

Seems clear the bifoil designs allow generation of RM,
the technique is trimming the boat with your weight,
and the heel resulting is to windward.
Yes the foils contribute to RM -because of their design.
===========
No. That is not the case-the foils have nothing to do with RM! RM is generated by a bi-foiler heeled to windward while 100% supported by two hydrofoils and/or two hydrofoils assisted by one Power Foil(which does contribute to RM!).
There is no other non-foiling dinghy that creates 20% more RM by being heeled to weather! Look at the previous posts on veal heel-there is much more to it than creating RM. Because it is so much different than "windward heel" on a normal dinghy or windsurfer it is deserving of a name that instantly conveys to those knowledgeble about/or interested in bi-foiler design exactly what is being discussed.

[bad dog]

Can we roll this discussion back one step - I want to clarify the distinction between righting moment (RM - with lots of thoughts above) and lift to windward (not discussed yet I don't think). I have got some of the ideas on the table here a bit confused between the two...

When the Moth heels to windward (no matter what the skipper's name ;-) the foils provide lift both vertically (up out of the water) and horizontally (to windward).

I had previously thought this was the major benefit of the "___heel" - which a level multihull platform is going to be hard pushed to emulate with standard tee foils. Assymetric foils used separately will achieve it of course.

The role of RM seemed to me to be subservient to the lift to windward (LW - is that an accepted acronym, or another neologism? ;-) Isn't this LW the main benefit? Surely RM is just a sideshow in comparison.

Then there is another beneficial side effect from inclining the rig to windward, a la sailboards, as yet unexplored here.

Dog, B.

[Doug Lord]

With veal heel extra RM is generated by the fact that the CG of the boat+ crew is to weather of the center of lift of the foils. The RM can be as high as 1.2 times the RM with the boat level and is ,essentially, free righting moment. In my opinion the gain in RM trumps everthing else though they all are dependent on and intertwined with each other.

From a previous post:

The advantages of veal heel on a bi-foiler:
1) produces side force from the lifting foils that can unload the vertical fin reducing the chance of ventilation. (major)
2) increases RM regardless of altitude(as long as hull structure is clear of the water).(major-very significant-approx. 20% increase in RM)
3) produces lift component from the sail that reduces foil loading.(minor)
4) shifts helmsman closer to the water decreasing the impact of his wind shadow on the sail and putting him in a slower moving portion of the wind boundary layer.(minor)

This rough sketch shows how a multihull using one power foil at a time would work.
-The angles shown are the angles from the vertical of the mast/mainfoil strut and the angle from vertical of the powerfoil strut.
-In this application both the mainfoil,rudderfoil and power foil contribute to lateral resistance and their respective vertical foils are unloaded.
-the sketch is one half of a trimaran.

[Chris Ostlind]

Let's just assume, for a moment, that this "concept" can actually work as advertised in a static environment. Yes, that's right... I said assume. We have to assume this possibility since the craft in question does not exist. But, let's just go ahead and do that for sake of conversation.

We are sitting here looking at a boat layout that allows for more righting moment. So, what are the advantages?

Can we carry more sail in any given wind condition?

Will the sailor be able to sit further inboard, rather than hike the craft, such as those already known and well tested?

Is the boat going to be heeled by manual ballast movement, (hiking) initially, until the outboard foil grabs and then the ballast gets to slide back inboard?

Will the boat actually go faster, or will it always be in a state of seesawing, never able to reach a state of balanced equilibrium?

Will it be adversely susceptible to water conditions that are not within its narrow, static bandwidth of operation?

How does the sailor maintain an upright condition when the outboard foil comes free and loses flow over the surface?

How does the sailor operate all the various controls to allow the boat to function as designed AND keep a wary eye for collisions, wind shifts, wave action, groundings of exposed foils, etc.?

How does the boat function repeatedly with such enhanced levels of maintenance required without high levels of invested time?

Looking out ahead of the curve, just a bit... How does the builder compensate for the added cost of very expensive foils?

Lastly, how does one argue for more complexity, more maintenance, more susceptibility to damage and more overall weight when there are boats already that will perform better for far less invested cash and time?

Yes, folks, before you all get up on your hind legs to argue that this is only speculative talk; That a boat of this type has not been built at all and that there are no real world proofs that it can work well enough to actually sail in a broad range of conditions... I get it. It's a what-if scenario.

And truly.. that is the point all along. It's vapor, non-existent, only on a squiggled sheet of paper. One other guy's take on the proposal is as valid as he who orginally made said proposal. When you only argue air, then we all stand at the same podium. Now, if said craft were built, tested and proved in a wide variety of conditions, (I'm thinking Rave, Trifoiler, etc., here) then it stops being a mental masturbation exercise and enters the world of, "hmmmmm?, maybe this could actually work, OR Geeez, what in the hell was I thinking? This thing stinks."

What I see above is an exercise in the patting of one's own back, all while ignoring that there are inherent limitations within the design that are being totally glossed-over in favor of what supposedly will work. This is, The Emperor’s New Clothes, being branded as a boat. Until the hard questions get just as much value in the argument as the so-called skimming of the cream elements, this is a doomed concept.

That's a very tidy description of fantasy.

As long as you all know it as that, then there's no problem. I happen to like playing pretend as much as the next guy. There is, however, a way to alter the existing paradigm...

Build a working example and get it on the water in front of lots of peers with substantive well-shot video and still imagery to support the argument... or debunk it, as well.

Dreamschemes are not for the risk averse.

[Paul B]

When the Moth heels to windward (no matter what the skipper's name ;-) the foils provide lift both vertically (up out of the water) and horizontally (to windward).

I had previously thought this was the major benefit of the "___heel" - which a level multihull platform is going to be hard pushed to emulate with standard tee foils. Assymetric foils used separately will achieve it of course.

The role of RM seemed to me to be subservient to the lift to windward (LW - is that an accepted acronym, or another neologism? ;-) Isn't this LW the main benefit? Surely RM is just a sideshow in comparison.


I believe your understanding is superior to some who think they are "experts" and love to claim that the rest of us "don't understand" what is happening.

[Gary Baigent]

Doug, you're cornered mate, show us your plans of say, a 9 metre fast ballasting bi foiler - with no lead keel either please.

[Gary Baigent]

Oh, and I forgot to add, plans to build - because your are backed hard against the wall now - don't have to be super detailed - just so we know what is going to come out of your boat shed. Also the 9 metre length is non-binding - you have a choice, but it has to be larger than 8.5 m. Cheers.

[Doug Lord]

Cornered hell! This thread is about a brand new idea for which no plans exist other than to test it on my new boat-read the thread!
How about the technical specs of a 60 footer? If it needs to be selfrighting it will require a canting keel. For an AC type to compete with DZ and CZ eliminate the canting keel and add Power Foils. Simple and very,very fast.
As for bi-foilers(without power foils) I have done preliminary design work(numbers)on a 60 foot self-righting bi-foiler and several self-righting Sportboat foilers and they could be adapted to the Power Foil concept.

Quote from the first post of this thread: "I think there may be a better way on a high performance trimaran that would use very small "amas" like the Rave but with a major difference: the new boat would use two foils-like a Moth- for boat speeds up to say, 20 knots. After that the boat would deploy(retractable) very small foils from the vicinity of the windward ama that would generate downforce to increase RM."

--------
--60' Moth self-righting bi-foiler: http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/sailboats/60-20-ocean-racing-monofoiler-design-discussion-15143.html Also see post 104 of the 60' Moth thread for an analysis of my preliminary calculations by R Hough.
--Sportboats: Design for Flight http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/sailboats/sportboats-design-flight-14606.html

[BWD]

No. That is not the case-the foils have nothing to do with RM!

Beg to differ.
And apparently you do too according to your last post.
The foils allow the good use of windward heel you like so much, duh.
"Veal heel, veal heel," you say, and say.

You pointed out yourself there would not be much benefit of windward heel
in these particular craft without them.
Their design and embodiment therefore obviously contribute to the RM developed.
But I can still call it John Wayne heel, or Elton John heel, or Elton Brown heel, if I want to.
But if you keep trying to put me down in such a high handed way,
I might have to slap some Chris Brown heel up in your grill.
What do you think, I was born yesterday?
Did you think I was imagining some mysterious torque
generated by a critical mass of carbon fibers?
(rhetorical, no answer needed)


You ought to be reminded as well of the role of the sail in holding the boat up,
which you seem to have forgotten in your last ad hominem misfire
If you don't believe me about the sail next time you are hiking out on your foiler :lol:
or windsurfer or kiteboard (or sunfish for that matter) try dumping the sheet
and see what is entirely supporting you.
By the way that nifty hydrofoil lift and stability will drop you quick too -sure you have seen some moths crash.
Hopefully you have a lifejacket.


equated the behaviour of a foil or foils that is highly loaded AT the air/water interface
with a fully submerged foil that is not near the air/water interface.

No I don't think I "equated" anything.
My main point (again) is with little highly loaded foils you have to worry about them ventilating, spinning out, stalling, etc.

But even if I had equated your design with another, my response would be, "So what?"
Little problems like trim changes and loss of foils' lift do tend to keep cropping up here and there in sailing, you know.
They are worth thinking about. I hoped the sailrocket picture might suggest to you to consider
how it can go when foils' lift is affected by sudden changes like ventilation, attitude and pressure changes, etc.
It is a dramatic example, no?

Your concept has interesting features, but no easy solutions. Not to say it's impossible.

In response to questions and challenges like you get when you present ideas on the forum,
at such an early design concept stage, some people might say:

"Yes I understand these problems, and they will be addressed through tuning and foil selection,
blah blah blah, etc, once a prototype is built, but right now
I am at the concept stage so I have other things to figure out first,
like my weights and costs...."

Rollin' out of here with my Jay Z heel on....

[Paul B]

Oh, and I forgot to add, plans to build - because your are backed hard against the wall now - don't have to be super detailed - just so we know what is going to come out of your boat shed.

The Lord's ability to prepare plans and actually design/engineer can be seen in post #32 (above), and added here in case it gets deleted from the other post.

[Doug Lord]

Beg to differ.
1)And apparently you do too according to your last post.
The foils allow the good use of windward heel you like so much, duh.
"Veal heel, veal heel," you say, and say.

You pointed out yourself there would not be much benefit of windward heel
in these particular craft without them.
Their design and embodiment therefore obviously contribute to the RM developed.

2) You ought to be reminded as well of the role of the sail in holding the boat up,
which you seem to have forgotten in your last ad hominem misfire
If you don't believe me about the sail next time you are hiking out on your foiler :lol:
or windsurfer or kiteboard (or sunfish for that matter) try dumping the sheet
and see what is entirely supporting you.
By the way that nifty hydrofoil lift and stability will drop you quick too -sure you have seen some moths crash.
Hopefully you have a lifejacket.



3)No I don't think I "equated" anything.
My main point (again) is with little highly loaded foils you have to worry about them ventilating, spinning out, stalling, etc.

But even if I had equated your design with another, my response would be, "So what?"
Little problems like trim changes and loss of foils' lift do tend to keep cropping up here and there in sailing, you know.
They are worth thinking about. I hoped the sailrocket picture might suggest to you to consider
how it can go when foils' lift is affected by sudden changes like ventilation, attitude and pressure changes, etc.
It is a dramatic example, no?

4) Your concept has interesting features, but no easy solutions. Not to say it's impossible.

In response to questions and challenges like you get when you present ideas on the forum,
at such an early design concept stage, some people might say:

"Yes I understand these problems, and they will be addressed through tuning and foil selection,
blah blah blah, etc, once a prototype is built, but right now
I am at the concept stage so I have other things to figure out first,
like my weights and costs...."


Now don't make me get all Chris Brown on you,
and leave you with a list
Rollin' out of here with my Jay Z heel on....
---------------------------------
1)The design and embodiment of the foils is not related one iota to veal heel as long as they support the boat 100%-as best I can tell now.

2) I think I posted at least twice that the lift from the sail is one of the benefits of veal heel. I also posted the paper by Bill Beaver that states the same thing. Its really difficult to quantify just how much the foil loading is reduced but you're 100% right -it is reduced.

3) You know, I think I have pointed out-perhaps not too clearly- that the concept boat when using the Power Foil upwind-in strong wind only- is very similar to the windward foil on a Rave hydrofoil whose function of "negative lift" has been proven in countless hours of Rave sailing in all conditions. The same thing with the Hobie trifoiler except that the altitude control is different but the net result is the same. My intention was to try to show that adding a Power Foil to each side of a trimaran bi-foiler is based on two different technologies very well proven in their own right. The combination is new and I will experiment with it-there is much to learn even though,again, the concept is based on two PROVEN technologies.

4) I started this thread by asking for comments; I said earlier that I appreciated your comments as I do most comments on this thread. I asked for comments so ,hopefully, I would be challenged about some of my assumptions and my theory-and I have been. I try to answer in as specific a fashion as I can-sorry for the slip-ups but this is a living concept that I learn more about every day. I sometimes respond to what I perceive as an "attitude" with an attitude and that is a mistake that I am trying hard to eliminate from my response. I do screw-up in that regard but I'm working hard to be as factual and as direct as I can be-and to be as clear as possible with no "smartassness" at all. At least that is the goal.

[Gary Baigent]

Doug, why don't you bite the bullet and draw some plans - and fucking build (I'll reduce the compulsory super Moth to 7 metres, Judge Judy talking and she rules, okay) and enough of this theoretical BS - there comes a time where you have to produce something solid (or lightweight with water ballast in your case) - suck and see and making stupid mistakes and education from empirical knowledge are the way to go, matey - (this could occupy you for years) otherwise you'll mathematics yourself over the moon and just produce ephemeral dreams. Waiting with bated breath for plan drawings. Cheers.

[Doug Lord]

Well, gee Gary, after the theoretical part is nailed the concept will be tested on my new boat. Thanks for your input. Really helps me think it out.

[Doug Lord]

For Gary: this is without a doubt the best way to use three foils(in the water) on a multihull-its only part time with just two foils the majority of the time plus:
* 15-20% more RM for free
* improved upwind performance
* earlier takeoff
* lower drag, especially in light to moderate air

[waynemarlow]

Hey guys and gals, this boat design forum is exactly that, a boat design forum, it shouldn't be a bun fight about peer pressure to build a said design.

One thing is for sure you can gleem a lot of good ideas from it and for those who are of the inclination, can go and build their own design. If it incorporates ideas from this forum than bloody great as that is exactly what this forum is for, an exchange of ideas.

Doug, keep up the good work, you do amongst many of your replies, have some good ideas and pass on many ideas gleemed from elsewhere on the internet that I may not have found.

[Chris Ostlind]

Wayne,

It's nice of you to moderate the interaction, as it were... but perhaps there is one small, but very important, aspect to what is going on here that you have missed.

Boat design talk, theory tossing, whatever... are all just stuff floating in the air and everyone knows that. It's all great fun, can serve a valid purpose and in some circles, is absolutely vital to the development of rich ideas. The real rub comes when someone starts in with the "it will be like this and it will perfom like this and it will be the best, fastest, most spectacular Wozzle ever seen on the water."

Nobody alive can make predictions such as that without either a great deal of expertise, or having already built said Wozzle and shown it to be of fabulous potential. Since none of that exists when it comes to our resident dreamer, the proof is entirely in the physical presentation of the pudding, as it were. Hey, it would be great if the guy were to actually produce something more than hyperbole. It's been said many times here, by many members... that they'd be the first to say congratulations. Yet, there has not been one thing fabricated that justifies the constant flow of words.

Since work progress is not being shown, it's not entirely out of place to suggest that the rhetoric should be squeezed back about ten notches until such time as a working example as a proof of concept can be shown repeatedly in a public place.

Take a moment to thread your way back through the various and sundry "ultra-important ideas" that have been tossed out here by said dreamer over the last five years... all of them, mind you, just brimming with overly complex concepts, and not one of them has ever been brought to fruition before the experienced sailors here.

Not one

I couldn't care less if Dream Boy ever puts a boat on the water. It would be graciously considerate, though, if our favorite prognosticator were to righteously dial back the endless rattle and humm until such time as this, five years in the making, wonder boat finally shows its mug in public.

Since that isn't going to happen (and looking back through the threads will show you that) one can only "strongly suggest" that Mr. Dream get into the shed and get something completed.

I say, suggest away with any old idea one pleases, Wayne. But, please, have the grace to know when one has overstayed the visit and excuse oneself to the work space. Please tell me that this isn't too much to ask?

[Doug Lord]

Hey guys and gals, this boat design forum is exactly that, a boat design forum, it shouldn't be a bun fight about peer pressure to build a said design.

One thing is for sure you can gleem a lot of good ideas from it and for those who are of the inclination, can go and build their own design. If it incorporates ideas from this forum than bloody great as that is exactly what this forum is for, an exchange of ideas.

Doug, keep up the good work, you do amongst many of your replies, have some good ideas and pass on many ideas gleemed from elsewhere on the internet that I may not have found.

==================
Thanks Wayne -you can bet I'll keep doing the best I can to present my own ideas and share other notable ideas I find in my travels. The world of small sailboats is exciting with a lot of opportunity for learning and experimenting.

[ancient kayaker]

It's about the ideas! That's the point. Some are builders, some are dreamers, some are both.

[Chris Ostlind]

Yadda-Yadda-Yadda... it's about the dreamers... whatever

Well, here's a fairly obscure invention that I plan to include in one of my next boats. If you're a Christian, then the power to which I'm connecting is obvious. I fully expect whatever boat I create to be faster, lighter and spend more time above the water than any mundane foiler shown on these pages.

Here's the copy describing the essential inclusion that will, more or less, light my way:

"Religious Lamp with Fluid Flow
patent#: US 7118242

Jesus said in the book of John, "I am the light of the world." Now have him light up your living room!

But of course, a light up Jesus would seem too simple to be patentable. But what if we add a little animatronics? According to the patent, "Jesus' head rises with light actuation." That's right, wake him up right at his most painful moment.

But the spiritual uplift doesn't end there. The inventor threw in some dripping blood pumps for that I-can't-believe-how-much-this-guy-suffered-for-me effect.

Mel Gibson, why hast thou not pursued the merchandising tie-in?

patent issued on 10/10/2006"

http://www.patentlysilly.com/


Read 'em and weap suckers.

And the beauty of the scheme... is that I never have to prove that it can work by actually building the damn thing. All I have to do is hype it endlessly with the same photos, the same vague and awful drawings and the same dredged-up posts a year from now, even though not one thing has been done to move the proofs along to a final expression. It's an endless game of blabbery to which I will never be held responsible.

Gimme some love, shower naive idolatry on me and indulge my iffy fantasies.

[bad dog]

Dear Mr Ostlind,

I think you are a finalist in the Most Cynical and Difficult To Get Along With People in The World Contest 2009. You won't win - you haven't met a NSW Labor Party politician - but you will be up there.

Best rearguards,

Mr Dog, B.

[waynemarlow]

Yadda-Yadda-Yadda... it's about the dreamers... whatever

Well, here's a fairly obscure invention that I plan to include in one of my next boats. If you're a Christian, then the power to which I'm connecting is obvious. I fully expect whatever boat I create to be faster, lighter and spend more time above the water than any mundane foiler shown on these pages.

Here's the copy describing the essential inclusion that will, more or less, light my way:

"Religious Lamp with Fluid Flow
patent#: US 7118242

Jesus said in the book of John, "I am the light of the world." Now have him light up your living room!

But of course, a light up Jesus would seem too simple to be patentable. But what if we add a little animatronics? According to the patent, "Jesus' head rises with light actuation." That's right, wake him up right at his most painful moment.

But the spiritual uplift doesn't end there. The inventor threw in some dripping blood pumps for that I-can't-believe-how-much-this-guy-suffered-for-me effect.

Mel Gibson, why hast thou not pursued the merchandising tie-in?

patent issued on 10/10/2006"

http://www.patentlysilly.com/


Read 'em and weap suckers.

And the beauty of the scheme... is that I never have to prove that it can work by actually building the damn thing. All I have to do is hype it endlessly with the same photos, the same vague and awful drawings and the same dredged-up posts a year from now, even though not one thing has been done to move the proofs along to a final expression. It's an endless game of blabbery to which I will never be held responsible.

Gimme some love, shower naive idolatry on me and indulge my iffy fantasies.

To be fair Chris, we do see ideas from Doug re foiling which just so happens is what I'm interested in at the moment, from you all I see is a personal vendetta and diatribe against the poster of some of those ideas. Chill out, enjoy the banter and promote your own foiling ideas to us all, certainly from a man with the experiance of designing boats that you have, almost certainly you will have some valuable nuggets for us all to digest.

If you are not prepared to resist in personal attacks then in my view, go somewhere else, at the moment you're spoiling my valuable reading time.

[BWD]

this is not the place to spend valuable time,
rather it is the place to await the thermoset reaction,
and the curing of paint.

[waynemarlow]

Ah but once the thermoset reaction is taking place, its too late to try that latest idea which just so happened to have been triggered by a quick read on a boat forum.:D

[Chris Ostlind]

To be fair Chris, we do see ideas from Doug re foiling which just so happens is what I'm interested in at the moment, from you all I see is a personal vendetta and diatribe against the poster of some of those ideas.




This is my space, as much as it is yours, Wayne. I do not see fresh innovative ideas here from Doug. Instead, what is presented is rehashed, recycled and already well haggled stuff from a person who is filling the bandwidth with a boat design philosophy which has been proven to be ineffective. If the "ideas" being presented had one whiff of potential beyond doodling exercises, then I'd be more than happy to engage the process in a positive fashion.

As to personal diatribe... If you were tossing this kind of crap out there in as regular a fashion as is Doug, I'd be after your stuff, as well. On that basis, alone, this is not personal.

When a person brings their stuff to a public forum, then they should be prepared to accept that there will be folks there who will be ready to offer their opinions. Don't like the opinions, as they are expressed, then take your stuff somewhere else. It's a mean, as well as kind, world, Wayne. My posts were in response to your posting, not to anything put up by Doug. You made your statements in that regard, and I had my say. Is that offensive to you... that I have an opinion that runs counter to yours and I have substance to back it up, and not just opinion?

Let's take Terry, (Ancient Kayaker) for example. Here's a guy who proposed a collection of ideas that went beyond the typical. He put it out there for everyone to see, much in the manner of your boy, DL. Immediately, he began to do something about his desire to explore the idea collection beyond the hype and talking stage. He built the boat and the rig and then he really went too far.... he put it on the water to see how it worked. Best of all, he posted the photos of this activity as a proof of concept on this public forum, eliciting comments from the members.

Anybody, Wayne, can draw a cool new idea for an atom bomb on a bar room napkin. This could work, as long as they recognize the limitations of their expression. If they observe a bit of decorum in how long they use sad drawing to crow about their expertise, everything is cool. Truth is, my friend, nobody is going to believe one word of their nonsense until they gather the components necessary for this wonderful device and prove that it can actually work to the level they ascribed in their hyperbole.

Apparently, you take the napkin sketch stuff from Doug as legitimate expression material of a working example and have awarded him the same level of respect as one who has actually done the hard part.... they made their device work.

Our friend, Gary Baigent in NZ, used to be somewhat supportive of the work as presented by Doug. If you have been reading along with the rest of us, you can clearly see that Gary, as well, has issued a call for something along the lines of substantive performance... and I quote,

"Doug, why don't you bite the bullet and draw some plans - and fucking build (I'll reduce the compulsory super Moth to 7 metres, Judge Judy talking and she rules, okay) and enough of this theoretical BS - there comes a time where you have to produce something solid (or lightweight with water ballast in your case) - suck and see and making stupid mistakes and education from empirical knowledge are the way to go, matey - (this could occupy you for years) otherwise you'll mathematics yourself over the moon and just produce ephemeral dreams. Waiting with bated breath for plan drawings."

Along with about ten thousand other boat design folks, as well as active foiling sailors, I completely concur. Your boy has managed to offend several World Champion sailors, many of them from the foiling community. He is not respected by the foiling design community, either. He hasn't produced squat and he continues to recycle his crap over and over as if it were a package of fresh ideas.

Somehow you and the Doggy have managed to put yourselves in the grasp of the Doug Lord tractor beam. You have a short moment here in which you can effect an escape. Pick your poison. ;-)

[waynemarlow]

Chris, Doug is not "my boy" and I'm old enough and I hope wise enough to be able to make up my own mind whether some one is rehashing ideas. I certainly along with many other readers on this forum don't need to be told by yourself what is worth reading or not. Your last remarks are not very enlightening nor do you much credit. To be honest whether I read someones views is none of your business.

What I come here onto this forum is to learn and accumulate ideas. Be careful, your constant petty bickering is not conducive to any forum being able to freely exchange ideas as people will simply move onto other forums as the Moth boys have done. Its when threads get off track and start to get more personal than detail to the thread, then the thread will immediately die.

It really is a shame that you in particular have killed off virtually every foiling thread with your personal attacks on Doug. I want to read about modern day foiling, in my opinion you are preventing that on this forum. You do on other threads make some very valid comments but on the foiling threads for whatever reason you seem to become almost irrational on your views.

Enough said, no grudges on my part and I'm now off to repair my T Foil which I inadvertantly broke whilst trying to land my cat on a very narrow slipway.:)

[Doug Lord]

Whenever new ideas or new combinations of old ideas are presented there are always people who use ridicule and personal attack to cover up there own
inability to enter into a technical discussion. I see that a lot in some threads. The Moth thread under "Sailboats" is the largest Moth thread on any forum anywhere and those kinds of responses have not killed it-they soil it, however. They have not killed "Foiler Design" in the same forum. They are unfortunate but I have learned how to handle it-finally- by simply never(almost) responding to that kind of thing.
The subject of Veal Heel for multihulls is not a rehash of anything-it is a unique concept that I only relatively recently came up with and it has great potential. It is important to realize-and those who study it will- that the concept uses PROVEN technologies simply combined in a different way with potential benefits not seen in any current multihull foilers. IT IS A BRAND NEW IDEA and there has not been time to incorporate it and test it but that will be done. Further, I've been working on my new boat that will test at least three different technologies over a 5 year period for some time and have run into the usual delays, stoppages etc. But I don't give up-and anyone who doubts that should simply review my gallery.
I enjoy discussing new ideas and presenting ideas here despite the risk of the thread being soiled by ridicule, personal attack, etc. I realize the reason for it and simply ignore it as best as possible. And I thank those who are interested enough to wade thru the trash to try to understand the concept and welcome any questions or well reasoned criticism. It helps me think it out until the point I can begin testing. We all have to sweep trash out of the way in our daily lives-and it can be done here as well -without letting it ruin our forum experience.
-----------------------------
Veal Heel for Multihulls-Proven Concepts combined in a New Way:Greg Ketterman and Dr. Sam Bradfield pioneered the use of fully submerged foils that use the foils to generate all the righting moment required for the boat-that happens above a certain speed when the windward wand(altitude control system) senses heel and causes the windward foil to pull down. Where most multihulls have a limit on what winds they can sail in based on crew weight/sailarea the limit for the Rave/Trifoiler type of multihull foiler is simply structural: you stop sailing when the book tells you to or you risk catastrophic structural failure.
Dr. Bradfields Rave was the first small foiler that I know of that had(has) retractable foils and not only that each foil(including the rudder foil) had(has)
TWO sailing settings designed to allow the boat to be sailed in shallower water than might otherwise be possible.
John Illetts Moth foiler was the first altitude controlled bi-foiler to win repeated races and Rohan Veal thru lots of sailing was able to discover the benefits of windward heel on a flying bi-foiler. Those benefits are a lot different than the benefits associated with windward heel on any other boat with a 15 to 20% increase in Righting Moment(for "free") being among the most important. The bi-foiler,as developed by John Illet and Rohan Veal and refined by people like Andrew McDougal has proven to be very close to the fastest boat under 20' in foiling conditions around a course beating every monohull including Aussie 18's and all cats including the A Class catamaran and F18's.
-----------------
The combination of the previous technologies:
A very interesting fact is that the top end speeds recorded by both the Hobie Trifoiler and the Rave exceed that of the Moth but the Moth takes off much earlier and is faster in winds up to 20 knots. I've talked to a lot of people who sail both boats and that is the consensus. The trifoiler and Rave generally perform poorly in light to moderate air but the Moth excels in those conditions.
--A multihull based on all these technologies would try to draw the best from each-it would:
1) use just two foils in light air thru the lower end of moderate air keeping surface penetrations and drag to a minimum to allow very light air takeoff. It would be designed to utilize veel heel just like any other bi-foiler to take advantage of the extra RM and other advantages(see the paper below).
2) use retractable foils with a couple of settings for shallow water performance.
3) use a relatively small retractable windward foil with a wand based altitude control system . The wand would be retracted and deployed with the foil(like the Rave). This "power foil" would only be used above a certain windspeed( say 15-20k) and would be determined by design and experimental testing.
=============
These are all proven concepts and there is every reason to believe that this new combination would have the potential to provide the best advantages of both the bi-foiler and tri-foiler in a new configuration that takes off very early-say 5 knots of wind and yet can be powered up in the strongest wind with a power foil.
Summary of advantages:
1) low windspeed takeoff
2) beach launchable
3) 15-20% more RM for "free"
4) reefable rig(allows large rig for light air)
5) at least two foil depth settings
6) adjustable wand(s) for variable altitude
7) retractable/ deployable windward foil/wand combination that pulls down for additional RM
8) sliding bench seats for comfortable crew movement(possible power assist down the line)
Note that 1-7 are now being used to one extent or another on the following foilers: Hobie trifoiler, Rave, Moth, RS 600FF Mirabaud and Hydroptere. This is just a different combination of PROVEN foiler technologies.#8 is under development for my new boat.
------------
Thanks for the interest, e-mails and PM's-this is mostly a great community! Don't hesitate to post ideas, reasoned criticism or ask questions-we will all learn!

[waynemarlow]

Doug, with the best will in the world, that long winded rehash of what you have already stated on numerous occassions, was entered at the wrong place and the wrong time. Duh talk about timing. We've been there and seen it before.

Now people can we move on to exploring decent arguments about foils ?

[Doug Lord]

Doug, with the best will in the world, that long winded rehash of what you have already stated on numerous occassions, was entered at the wrong place and the wrong time. Duh talk about timing. We've been there and seen it before.

Now people can we move on to exploring decent arguments about foils ?
=================
Wayne, because it seemed that the thread had gone off track I tried to do a summary of the concept relating it to the existing technology that serves as the basis for the idea. I just reread the whole thread and I had not done that before......at least not all in one post.Sorry.

[Chris Ostlind]

I tell you what, Wayne....

Get your fanny over to Sailing Anarchy and create a thread in which you ask, openly... "what individual has single-handedly ruined virtually every foiler thread ever posted on Sailing Anarchy.

I can assure you that there are hundreds more foiling enthusiasts on those pages than there are here and I think that the responses you get will be most enlightening, considering your current bias.

Specifically, you can write directly to the current World Champion of the foiling Moth Class, Bora Gulari and ask him to make some detailed comments to that same end. If you like, I'll send Bora a note and ask him to respond to your query. Bistros also knows Bora and can do the same on your behalf. The World Champion... who better to offer-up his own take on the legitimacy of Doug Lord within the foiling community? If you are hesitant, I'll save you the time. Doug has insulted Bora so many times that there's no way he'll ever tell you that Doug is a positive influence in the community. That same result will, literally, cascade in your direction from the members of the Sailing Anarchy Dinghy Forum. In any event, you should follow-up on your own because, you know, I might be slinging crap right now just to fake you out.

Another good person to query would be Sam Schneider. He's a great guy who is designing and building his own foiler in Colorado, USA. Sam is very technically addept and has assembled a first rate team of consultants who are helping him build a "Moth on Steroids" for his personal enjoyment. If you really are personally engaged in the process of diddling around with a foiling idea, I'm sure that Sam will be a great source of info, as well as support. You can pointedly ask Sam if I have done damage to the foiling community as he sees it and if Doug is not the real source of negative energy on the topic.
http://sr-71monofoilerproject.blogspot.com/

When you have the sack to run an open ended question before the majority of foiler enthusiasts on the Internet and then post your results here, you can make your lame observations about my so-called impact on the subject material. Until you do so, you're just another guy who has chewed too long and too lovingly on the bone, as it is presented by Your Boy Doug.

I know what you'll get in response and I suspect that you do as well if you really set your mind to it. The question is, will you have the personal courage to admit you spoke in error and subsequently make an apology right here on these pages, or will you show yourself as something entirely different?

Go ahead... You want to sling some crap? Get your fanny on over there and man-up. I'm confident of the results you will receive and will wait while you collect your due.

Ironically enough, Doug managed to prove most of my points in spades with the previous post to which you remarked with what must have been deep embarrassment. Is it not clear enough for you, Wayne? The guys over at Sailing Anarchy refer to this type of Doug Lord inanity as GroundHog Day, after the movie.

If posing the question over on SA is just too much for you to absorb, then, by all means, write me off-list and you and I can engage in any discussion you wish. My email address is available all over the place and you can leave a comment on any of the articles on my website, as I read them all. Our private dialogue will be held in confidence.

Best Regards,

[redreuben]

Was Mike Nelson the school bully?

[Chris Ostlind]

Was Red Reuben the leader of those with the pronounced sagittal crests?

[DarthCluin]

There are many Mike Nelsons, but my favorite was an ex-navy frogman aptly portrayed by Lloyd Bridges in the syndicated TV show "Sea Hunt". If there was a problem or a mystery you talked to Mike. After much swimming about and the cutting of the occasional air hose he fixed it. :D

[redreuben]

Like all good days out fishing the flats... have patience and eventually the prey will rise to the bait.

Thanks, Chris.

[waynemarlow]

Go ahead... You want to sling some crap? Get your fanny on over there and man-up. I'm confident of the results you will receive and will wait while you collect your due.

If posing the question over on SA is just too much for you to absorb, then, by all means, write me off-list and you and I can engage in any discussion you wish. My email address is available all over the place and you can leave a comment on any of the articles on my website, as I read them all. Our private dialogue will be held in confidence.

Best Regards,

Chris ,Sadly I found some of the threads over on SA to be not very worthy of the read, there was far too much bias towards the Moth which is a great boat for the lean greyhounds but totally impractical for the fat old farts like me. In truth the Moth is a great platform, but I can already beat the Moth around the course on a majority of ocassions and can average over 19 knots over a 30 second period on an existing cat platform, so why go down this route apart from wanting to get involved in foiling ?

Which leaves this forum as probably one of the better places to seek factual unbiased, totally free information. There are some very knowledgable guys here on this forum who could be extremely helpful to those wanting to experiment in foiling but and here is the big but. We have two posters who seem to be so totally at logger heads that the good guys have left the forum.

One who is extremely enthusiastic about the whole foiling thing that he simply pisses everbody off with his constant postings. Couple that with the fact he has a skin of a rhino, absolutely no political nous and has become so besotted with foiling that he now believes he has invented the whole thing.

The other poster simply has so much free time on his hands that he checks out all the foiling threads even though he hates anything to do with foiling, any ideas are immediately attacked as being unworkable and dare a thread get going its his personal mantra in life to immediately kill it off just in case the rest of the readers have an opinion on the subject. The time it must take to monitor these threads and reply must take up most of his free time.

So boys and girls can we get back to foil design and the practicalities thereof or are we going to continue in the usual manner of useless point making that has nothing to do with foils.

[ancient kayaker]

... Which leaves this forum as probably one of the better places to seek factual unbiased, totally free information. ...

Here, here! We can do better.

I think the title of the thread is confusing, it’s nothing to do with windward heel really, and the considerable non-technical content of this thread is a bit confusing also, so I’ll toss in a para on the concept to focus the discussion before I weigh in with my thoughts.

As I understand it the proposed concept is an attempt to combine the Moth’s ability to fly in light winds due to its light weight and low drag, with the greater speed (in more wind) of a multihull due to its ability to carry more sail. What is proposed is a lightweight trimaran with Moth-style foils on the vaka and deployable foils on the amas. When deployed the windward ama-born foil would generate downward force to augment the RM of crew weight.

1) the idea of increasing RM by increasing downward force on the windward ama without using ballast to has obvious merit
2) the extra weight and complexity of the basic concept, compared to a regular moth, need not be very great and could probably be retrofitted to an existing boat ... but
3) during the transition from 2 foils to 3 foils the sudden introduction of offset drag during deployment will slew the boat sharply windward ... and
4) during the transition from 2 foils to 3 foils, as the downward force increases the lift of the “main” foils must be increased in concert to compensate
5) the additional complexity required to fix problems 3) and 4) will likely outweigh the advantages of 1) so just forget about 2)

Assuming it worked, if I were about to launch such a boat in light wind conditions, the first thing I would want to do is remove all the extra stuff to save weight.

It might be simpler, safer, and more effective to have 2 foilers, a Moth-like one for light conditions and a Rave type one to take advantage of heavier breezes. To save cost, perhaps the basic hull and sail could be common.

The concept can certainly be employed advantageously in a trimaran foiler which used ama-born foils. One approach is to use differential incidence. The Greg Ketterman quote in post #13 called it “dynamic leveling affect” or DLA. The differential forces that create the additional RM are applied across the full spacing of the amas with this idea, rather than between the main foil-bearing hull and the windward ama of the proposed concept. Half the force for the same RM means less drag.

There is also the rather scary Happy Feet concept which involves balancing an entire cat on laterally movable foils, see http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/sailboats/kisscut-new-swiss-foiler-29106-3.html

Another way to achieve DLA is by pulling water ballast into the windward ama through a small opening in the windward foil. The additional weight would be gradual and added drag could be negligible if implemented properly. With the ama flying, dumping the water would obviously be done quicker. Nothing new about movable water ballast of course, but I don’t see why it can’t be done on a foiler.

Whatever is done along these lines, it will be at the cost of increasing drag as the leeward foil has to increase its lift. Whether that would leave any advantage from the additional drive available remains to be seen.

[Doug Lord]

Thanks Terry. My only quibble is that 15-20% extra righting moment (plus the other advantages of veal heel) for "free" is a substantial "charateristic" of this concept. One that must be designed into a trimaran foiler to be able to work at that level.
For what it is worth, in model testing with the F3 the windward foil would sometimes come clear and when it re-entered there was no directional affect at all.

[ancient kayaker]

Agreed, Doug. I question how much windward heel RM can provide on a trapeze-equipped monohull or a multihull design. The width obviously limits the angle one can obtain before the windward structure hits the surface or the leeward foil ventilates, although it worked for Rohan.

I think the windward water ballast idea has potential. A foiler should move fast enough for the tanking-up method used by water bombers to work.

Compared to the deployable foil concept, the force couple works across the full span instead of only half, requiring half the force. No downward lift is needed, only upward lift from the leeward foil, so the net drag should be only 25%. On the other hand, it is not going to be a light-wind boat.

It would be fairly easy to try, I think, at least to establish the principle; just an intake and tube to the foil strut.

If it works, there is an interesting possibility that the intake can be placed at a positive pressure location on the upper foil surface, or deployed as a slot, for maximum efficiency, but first things first.

[Doug Lord]

Terry, veal heel is good for up to a 20% increase in RM.The angle* of the cross arms needs to be greater than on a "normal" tri to maintain clearance when the boat is heeled to weather. The windward water ballast is a good idea-Hydroptere uses a system similar to the one you describe. It uses an intake on the rudder and dynamic pressure to fill a tank in the windward ama.
I visualize the windward foil generating something around 400lb of downforce(max) on a 18-20' version of the concept boat (a little over 6 cu.ft. of water-could be in the ama- using it as a tank?). Not sure how practical that much water is on a small beach sailed boat. Intake would have to be -like Hydroptere- on the rudder (or main foil?) and that might be tough on a small boat but we know it works well on larger boats. The waterballast system might have less total drag when the boat is powered up-but might be harder to tack unless there was a relatively quick way to get the water to the other side. Worth thinking about.
--------
One thing that may not have been mentioned is that the maximum effect of veal heel is determined to some extent by how long the daggerboard(vertical strut) is.
The longer the board is, the more the CG of the boat + crew is moved to weather at any given angle. And the result is unaffected by altitude as long as no part of the hull structure touches the water.
=========
I'm posting the sketch* of 'half a tri' again so you won't have to refer back to page one to visualize it:

The 20 degrees angle is from the vertical(and mislabeled--sorry)

[Chris Ostlind]

Well, you've missed it again, Wayne. It shows your lack of depth on the matter and specifically, my direct input on the topic since day one. If you have the temerity, go look it up. If not... here's the summation.

I am not against foiling. Never have been... never will be. I do not think it is the savior of all things sailing and that is not going to change in your lifetime. Foiling is a decidedly minority splinter activity within a much greater and far more diverse sailing community. Multihulls are a small segment of the greater sailing community and they so completely dominate the presence of foiling that foiling is virtually invisible by comparison. One should never attempt to elevate ones importance in the grand scheme of things if one seeks to be taken seriously.

I enjoy the activity (foiling) as a small time expression within the greater whole, but it's going nowhere for the everyday sailor for a very significant variety of reasons. These reasons have been listed on these pages frequently, so I'll not bother to enumerate the list again. You should make yourself familiar with the shortcomings, as well as the possible positives. A failure to do so is a one way ticket to irrelevance.

Your Boy, Dougie, only involves himself with the potential positives while totally ignoring the reality of the shortcomings. He has repeatedly mustered-up overly complex variants without one single notion of the shortcomings they represent. Really, Wayne, I should think that a guy with your apparent gusto would have long ago figured that out and gotten yourself involved with a much more solidly configured source.

What you do not know about me is that I've drawn some five different foil equipped craft in the last five years and rather than bother the readers here with a boat that has little to no commercial value in the short, or long term, I have kept them shelved. Your Boy, Doug, by comparison has no such self-limiting device internally and listens to nothing from external sources, either. He's a One Trick Pony who is deaf to the outside world, constantly churning-out his Rube Goldbergian devices, extracted from the parts department of the local chandlery.

I generally believe in simpler solutions to what is going on within the sailing community, not more complex and more expensive. You want to build a boat for yourself so that you can diddle with the variables until the day you croak, please, my man, have at it. While you are doing so, please have the good grace to rid yourself of the hyperbole associated with your Chosen One and present yourself with some measure of dignity when others provide input; whether good or bad.

If you can do that, then you'll be miles ahead of your guru and just may make a positive contribution to the genre. Right now, I'm not so sure that you get it.

[Rick Willoughby]

This is not sailing but is a nice little foiler that I did the prop design for.

The design point was 7m/s (say 14kts) with 450W on the prop. This was with a commercially available prop that was about 5% less efficient than the ideal. I do not have actual test data other than this video link that I posted on another thread:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh_RhkejWLw

I think it is a slick little machine.

I generally agree with Chris on the prospects for foiling as the main game but I can certainly see something like this getting sales. It is similar to a two seater electric foiler I posted on another thread.

Just to move the topic on a bit.

Rick W

[redreuben]

Well Chris Old Boy,

If you scroll back through this thread it's pretty clear who is responsible for most of the clutter. It is also clear from the threats of violence and your enthusiasm to carry on off list that the bully comment was right on the money.
The time you are devoting to stalking other members and spitting bile and animosity into this forum explains why your'e entire portfolio at Duckworks still says "coming soon".

[ancient kayaker]

... I visualize the windward foil generating something around 400lb of downforce(max) on a 18-20' version of the concept boat (a little over 6 cu.ft. of water-could be in the ama- using it as a tank...

That's more than I expected; I thought you were proposing a Moth-sized boat. I was assuming about the same weight as the crew, for one up, say 160 lb, which could easily be accommodated by a small ama: That would double the RM available from crew weight alone.

... Intake would have to be -like Hydroptere- on the rudder ...

That seems odd, since the direction of the water would have to reverse. A spot on the foil strut seems more logical and simpler.

... The waterballast system might have less total drag when the boat is powered up-but might be harder to tack unless there was a relatively quick way to get the water to the other side ...

I wasn't thinking of transferring the water to the other side for tacking. Although it could be done its effectiveness would depend on the heel angle and it would be uphill when heeling to windward.

With the ama clear of the water it would run back out under gravity prior to a tack, definitely not after tacking, though! After tacking the other ama would be topped up. Probably too busy a system for racing where quick reactions are often needed but for outright speed, simply having fun or time-around -the-bouy runs against the clock, perhaps more practical.

... One thing that may not have been mentioned is that the maximum effect of veal heel is determined to some extent by how long the daggerboard(vertical strut) is. The longer the board is, the more the CG of the boat + crew is moved to weather at any given angle ...

That was clear from the start. Height of strut also would influence max heel angle.

Having watched more foiling videos, I wonder if the additional RM is the real advantage of heeling to windward. I suspect it either adds to the lateral balance of the boat or makes it easier for the crew to react to and control variations of heeling moment due to wind fluctuation and other factors. However , not having flown a foiler that is just MHO.

[waynemarlow]

Chris, tote up the number of hours you have spent on this thread alone, stop and take a breath and then ask this question to yourself " have I contributed to this thread in a meaningful and helpful way to discuss " Veal Heel " ? If the answer is no then stop, take a breath and think of how you could have spent those hours doing a more useful task, perhaps spending time with the family, sailing, anything really thats just more useful.

Ancient Kayaker, in my opinion Veel Heel is a non runner in anything other than a Bi foil design. have a look at the best of the tri foilers such the Rave and the Hobie Tri Foiler ( and talking to owners confirm this ), all videos that I have seen show the windward foil at or about the surface. This indicates to me that the whole boat is inclining to leeward ( as you would expect in a practical way from the drag on the sails ) and for all intents and purposes the leeward foil is now inclined in a manner which is having exactly the opposite to Veel Heel ie its forces are now directed toward the leeward. Sorry Doug but it ain't going to happen in a practical way.

If you increase the RM by inclining the windward foil to get a higher angle of attack of the windward Ama then the surface drag of the foil will be higher slowing the boat rather then the benefiting ( I think the Maths will say otherwise but we have to think in a pratical way and all videos seem to show the foil at the surface where they are most inefficient ). Remember foiling at this stage of development is totally dependant on extremely light weight vessels and needing to use minimum foil ( lifting ) size to reduce the drag from the foil. Get that balance wrong and you are better off with a conventional hull.

Now ballasting the Ama may work but it is a big " may " the practicalities of ballasting whilst underway at speed and when you start to ballast are going to need the input of a dedicated crew, you maybe just better off sending the crew out on the Ama ?

Now the Bifoiler is a different beastie in particular the Moths because of their low sail area and high RM of the skipper, the foil can be inclined to weather inducing a small lift toward weather. Increase the sail area and the size of the boat and it all becomes marginal, not from a foil issue but from a physcological issue. Imagine sitting on a windward rail below the boat, it ain't half gonner be wet wild and downright scarry, increase the height of the rails to lift the ballast and you are going to have a huge effect on aerodynamics:D

[bad dog]

That little foiler is good. Stability would be improved by slightly wider stance of fwd foils, but what the hey. It reminds me of an International Solar Class boat from (damn - can't remember the name of the US university! - anyone?) which competed in the solar boat race in Canberra in 2001 (bloody thing beat us too). It had a foiler mode, which worked if they loaded it with batteries to get it up, but it would not fly on pure solar.

I wonder if the power to weight balance might have shifted in the last 8 years, and a little foiler like that one in the youtube video might run on pure solar. If the motor is about 450w, and the prop was tuned (difficulty there - early static thrust vs foiling speed), with lightweight panels it just might work. Broad stance (beam) would be important to keep the PV array from allowing it to be blown over by a breeze though.

Here is a photo of our boat, it isn't hard to imagine foils on it, with stiffer beams. Anyone want to throw a competitor together (like - actually build one - keep both Ostlind and Lord happy!) ???

[ancient kayaker]

... Ancient Kayaker, in my opinion Veel Heel is a non runner in anything other than a Bi foil design ....
-I think we agree on that, but others may not.

... If you increase the RM by inclining the windward foil to get a higher angle of attack of the windward Ama then the surface drag of the foil will be higher slowing the boat rather then the benefiting ...
-initially I was looking at Doug’s idea of a deployed windward foil with negative lift; you would be correct for that case.

For a boat with permanent ama-born foils both providing lift, their incidence could be changed in opposite directions to create extra RM, as Greg Ketterman suggested. Provided this differential incidence is not overdone, the extra drag from the leeward foil would be cancelled, at least partially, by reduced drag from the windward foil. *

However, once the windward foil is producing actual negative lift the total drag would increase significantly. Whether extra sail thrust could overcome that remains to be determined.

... foiling at this stage of development is totally dependant on extremely light weight vessels and needing to use minimum foil ( lifting ) size to reduce the drag ... ballasting the Ama may work but it is a big " may " the practicalities of ballasting whilst underway at speed and when you start to ballast are going to need the input of a dedicated crew, you maybe just better off sending the crew out on the Ama ? ...
-again, I agree completely. The idea of the ballast was, in effect, to be able to pick up weight equivalent to an extra crew person once flying, with an extremely lightweight foiler that would still have the ability to fly in light airs. Unlike the differential foil incidence of Greg’s, the extra weight is going to create more drag as the foils must provide additional lift. As well as the plumbing, it might present some serious design challenges to get a foil design that can accommodate a wide range of loads. Whether it will work or be defeated by engineering or control problems remains to be seen. I don’t think I can take on the work, I am not in good enough shape for foiling!

* This is an intermediate case that is particularly interesting as it has the potential to open up foiling to the athletically challenged like me, who could adjust RM while remaining in the cockpit.

[waynemarlow]

-
* This is an intermediate case that is particularly interesting as it has the potential to open up foiling to the athletically challenged like me, who could adjust RM while remaining in the cockpit.

But you are not unique, travelling at over 20 knots does tend to give a very rough ride, I personally think that the cockpit of the Rave and TriFoiler has been derived for very good practical reasons, I'm not sure that a closed in cockpit would ding my bells though:)

[Doug Lord]

Ancient Kayaker, in my opinion Veel Heel is a non runner in anything other than a Bi foil design. have a look at the best of the tri foilers such the Rave and the Hobie Tri Foiler ( and talking to owners confirm this ), all videos that I have seen show the windward foil at or about the surface. This indicates to me that the whole boat is inclining to leeward ( as you would expect in a practical way from the drag on the sails ) and for all intents and purposes the leeward foil is now inclined in a manner which is having exactly the opposite to Veel Heel ie its forces are now directed toward the leeward. Sorry Doug but it ain't going to happen in a practical way.

D
===============
I'm not sure I understand this. I've got a lot of hours foiling a Rave as well as with my F3. The windward foil doesn't start to pull down until the wind is over about 18-20 knots apparent(Rave). It begins to pull down as a response to the heel of the boat: the wand tip goes down a bit further causing the back end of the flap to come up generating downforce. And if equipped with one of the bolt modifications invented by Doran Oster, it works even better.
Now, this has nothing to do with my veal heel concept multifoiler which is DESIGNED to sail on just two foils in light and moderate air. And the power foils are small foils-about half the size or less of the mainfoil. Like any bi-foiler the crew sets up veal heel. The power foil can be deployed when conditions appear to warrant it. The power foil on the multifoiler concept also uses a wand that is set to fly the foil at the correct depth as it is on the main foil and on the Rave foils. The wand(and tension on the bungee) controls foil depth.
If I understand you correctly you're saying that the veal heel concept boat of this thread will work because it is designed to sail on two foils? If thats correct I 100% agree with you.
On the other hand, a multifoiler like the Rave or F3 or Hobie trifoiler COULD NEVER BENEFIT from veal heel-they are not designed to do so and they won't ever be suitable for it.
The L/D ratio of the "power foils" on the concept boat is excellent as shown earlier.
Am I understanding you correctly?

[waynemarlow]

No I don't think you do understand what I mean.

Lets just consider the Veel Heel effect on a 3 foil boat. Now my understanding is that when a foil is inclined beyond the horizontal in either direction it will create a small amount of a sideways vector of lift. Now if the boat leans to leeward it stands the main leeward foil ( the windward foil starts to rise ) more vertical or if the foil is vertical originally, over vertical, at this point the Veal Heel effect is gone or working against lift toward the windward side.

I feel in most practical occassions this will be the case. Also I think the windward foil will be probably working much less efficiently than expected due to its closeness to the surface and so can not be expected to be able to create much negative lift without sacrificing a lot of extra surface drag which for all intents and purposes will slow the boat down. The skipper would be far better to release the loading on the main and let the boat level for better effiecency.

Speaking of the main would we not be better off to simply move the base of the mast across to the leeward side to better balance the loading on the foils + it would incline the sail to get a lifting force from the sail as per the windsurfers ?

As to your power foil idea it maybe an ideal aspiration but in the practical sense I wouldn't be bothering to build it any time soon, far to many things to get right and even more so, far too many things to go wrong.

[Doug Lord]

No I don't think you do understand what I mean.

Lets just consider the Veel Heel effect on a 3 foil boat. Now my understanding is that when a foil is inclined beyond the horizontal in either direction it will create a small amount of a sideways vector of lift. .
============================
Wayne, veal heel won't work on a three foil boat. It will work on almost any 2 foil boat-where they(the 2 foils) are the primary lift( 80% on the main foil,20% on the rudder foil).
And veal heel isn't an "effect" it is an intentional technique that is done deliberately by the skipper.
The only boat other than a two foil foiler that I can see veal heel working on is the concept boat of this thread that uses two foils for 100% of lift and two foils(one at a time) for additional RM in moderate to strong wind. The power foil/wand combination, once engaged by the skipper, holds the boat at a 20 degree angle of heel to windward and automatically maintains itself at the proper depth-just like any other wand controlled foil does.
I guess I don't understand what part of this that you think won't work. I'd appreciate it if you can help me get it.

[DaveJ]

I've been reading this thread from start to now, and alittle lost with all the bickering and slandering comments as to what the main purpose of Veel Heel is trying to achieve. From what i can understand is the sailor is trying to make the foil (on the moth) to tilt upwards and windard to try to pinch as much of the course he can towards the winward marker, using the foil to crab the boat towards the winward marker. Also i understand that the problem with fast boats when closed hauled is that due to their forward speed the relative wind changes and the end result the boat has to bare away from the true wind and a boat that is not so fast will set a course closer to the windward marker and thus sails less distance. Hence the reason they Veel Heal the moth. Now for a more than 2 foil boat, is it really needed to Veel heal the boat, or would it be better to change the AoA of the vertical portions of the foils to help the boat crab towards the windward marker or something like a gybing centre board.

As for RM, the tilded foils on the leeward hull won't help in the slightest, as the boat starts to tilt towards leeward, the foil will provide more lift, which will lift the boat higher out of the water because of the extra lift, but doesn't have a anti roll portion so all that will happen is the boat will be higher out of the water when it blows over. The windward foil is going to have the greatest effet on RM, as long as it doesn't stall it will keep pull that hull down. Which comes down to the fidelity of of the foil system, how quick it can react to a change.

I have a interest in where this thread heads, as i'm researching ideas to foil my hobie 18.

Dave,

[bad dog]

Yep, good recap Dave.

An aspect of the heal not fully discussed yet is the pinching effect. If the boat turns on its centreline axis into the wind (as in conventional pinching technique) the apparent vs true wind position is well understood.

But if the veal heel lifts the boat without changing its centreline axis, there must be some effect, but is it more theoretical than actual, given the changeable nature of wind at the surface of the water?

[Doug Lord]

See the paper(towards the end) attached to the first post for an in depth explanation of veal heel. One of the biggest advantages of veal heel on a multihull bi-foiler is the increase in RM-up to 20% for "free". Improvement in windward ability is another bi-product of veal heel which will work on a multihull bi-foiler as well. I have to mention again : veal heel will only work on a multihull foiler specifically designed for it.

[waynemarlow]

Has anyone done a calculation of where the cross beam ( say 2.5m ) will be in relation to the water at 20 degrees, its gotter be getting pretty close or the leeward side will have to be pretty high ?

[Doug Lord]

Has anyone done a calculation of where the cross beam ( say 2.5m ) will be in relation to the water at 20 degrees, its gotter be getting pretty close or the leeward side will have to be pretty high ?

This gives you the idea-you could print it and use a couple of different scales.
The lee cross arm is at a higher than "normal" angle in this configuration....The point is to give the ama about the same clearance you give the main hull. Altitude above the water can be varied with these caveats:
1) The foil tips(main foils and power foils) must be designed and set-up(with wand adjustment) to be 2.5-3 chords below the surface at all times.
2) The longer the struts, within structural and depth(off foils) considerations,
3) strut(vertical fin) length has an affect on max veal heel-altitude can be varied with a fixed length vertical fin with no affect on veal heel.
------------
angles are from vertical....
beam is a little over 15 feet-with1/2 shown in the sketch...

[Paul B]

This gives you the idea-you could print it and use a couple of different scales.


Wow, this is really something.

This sketch has been shown time and again, and The Lord of Non-Foiling continues to post it with all the inaccuracies intact. He seems to be very proud of this sketch. Sadly any 6th grade art teacher, high school drafting instructor, or any physics professor would grade it a Failure.

[ancient kayaker]

Has anyone done a calculation of where the cross beam ( say 2.5m ) will be in relation to the water at 20 degrees, its gotter be getting pretty close or the leeward side will have to be pretty high ?

At 20 deg of heel, assuming the foils remain at the same height the end of the beam (2.5 m end to end) will move vertically by 43 cm (17")

The 15' offset beam in Doug's sketch will move by 5 ft (1.5 m)

[Paul B]

At 20 deg of heel, assuming the foils remain at the same height the end of the beam (2.5 m end to end) will move vertically by 43 cm (17")

The 15' offset beam in Doug's sketch will move by 5 ft (1.5 m)

You have made an incorrect assumption based on the sketch presented.

This just clarifies why the sketch is so worthless. It cannot be interpreted easily, even by people who know something about the subject.

[waynemarlow]

7.66 feet is about 2.3 m hence my original question, and 7.66 + 7.66 ie a Tri is near enough 15 feet. Now one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out from the drawing or is that too difficult for you Paul B.

Any chance we can get away from "have a pop at Doug at any opportunity" to a reasonable discussion on foiling ?

[ancient kayaker]

You have made an incorrect assumption based on the sketch presented ...

I took another look and you're right: I should have looked closer; my number can be halved; better, but 2.5 ft/76 cm still seems quite a lot.

[Paul B]

7.66 feet is about 2.3 m hence my original question, and 7.66 + 7.66 ie a Tri is near enough 15 feet. Now one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out from the drawing or is that too difficult for you Paul B.

You might note that I'm not the one who mis-interpreted the drawing, even though I don't work on rockets.

Why don't you count up the mistakes on that drawing and tell us how many you find? Shouldn't take a rocket scientist to count them up.

I really hope you follow The Lord's advice on foiling. That way you will be just as successful as he has been.

[Chris Ostlind]

So, there it is... Another dispute regarding the input of Doug Lord's so-called mastery on the topic and just who is the common denominator... Why it's our boy, Wayne, the defender of the Lord mystique.

Want to get some non-fevered input on the topic. Do what I suggested several posts ago and make friends with Sam Schneider, get your butt on over to Sailing Anarchy where there are real foiling experts and post your interests with them.

If you are lucky enough and Doug doesn't make his presence felt, you'll get all sorts of guys to come out and offer-up the best of information that would take you years to discover on your own... if ever. Write them offlist and the world will open to you like never experienced on this list.

Gary Baigent is running on SA as CoxCreek. You'll find the guys who did the Canadian C-Class cat there, something like two dozen, or more, Aussies and Kiwis, who have hundreds of hours of foil experience in all areas of the application and a friendship potential that will make your head spin.

This is simply a friendly nudge. If you are really looking to understand some specific applications in the foiling genre, do yourself a favor.

[waynemarlow]

Guys, Doug's lack of drawing skills shouldn't have anything to do with a discussion on boat design. Perhaps ask politely to clarify a drawing but never just diss a poster for the sake of dissing someone.

In my view and I think many others who have become very disillusioned with the pettiness ( in my view almost childish bullying ) so totally off thread, I'm asking politely that if you cannot contribute in an informed way then don't bother.

Chris you are a very well informed boat designer, why not contribute with ideas and informed discussion, if foiling isn't your thing then move on to better more interesting pastures.

[Chris Ostlind]

Guys, Doug's lack of drawing skills shouldn't have anything to do with a discussion on boat design. Perhaps ask politely to clarify a drawing but never just diss a poster for the sake of dissing someone.



Drawing skills most certainly do have something to do with boat design. They have been the central medium for communication from designer to builder ever since man with a hammer moved away from "Yeah, that looks about right". Accurate drawings are at the core of performing accurate calculations. The entry of accurate numerical values on the drawings is essential if one is to be able to fully understand the relationships as designed. That an individual purports himself or herself as a designer and can not properly represent themselves with decently presented drawings is not only weak, but it is potentially dangerous.

Wayne, this stuff is pounded into the heads of every young person who goes through any sort of design school and it sits at the center of one's ability to convey one's conceptual ideas. I don't know where you get this kooky idea that well done drawings are not essential, but it is as wrong as it can be.

There are other arguments associated with this topic, but I'll leave them alone for the time being.




In my view and I think many others who have become very disillusioned with the pettiness ( in my view almost childish bullying ) so totally off thread, I'm asking politely that if you cannot contribute in an informed way then don't bother.



Consider for a moment, then, that your adherence to the material put forth by your guru also represents a childish willingness to play follow the leader. Simply because Doug talks a good line about this material does not mean he knows of what he speaks. Ask him to show you the proof of concept photos showing his most accomplished full-sized foiler as it lifts-off from the surface and flies, under control, for several hundred meters. Go ahead, ask him.

Truth is he will not do so, because he can not do so. The imagery does not exist because the event never took place. Yet, here you guys are, traipsing around behind the guy as if he has it in the bag and there is so much to learn from his guidance. Hey, do you guys want to buy some shares in my elaborate pyramid scheme? You know, the one that enriches me and leaves you destitute and shaking your heads?



Chris you are a very well informed boat designer, why not contribute with ideas and informed discussion, if foiling isn't your thing then move on to better more interesting pastures.


Wayne, this is where your lack of knowledge about what has gone down on this Forum for more than five years shows itself in spades. Way back when Douglas first proposed his idea of a "People's Foiler", which has now shown itself to be but one of many non-realistic endeavors in the genre, I offered-up many, many ideas and solutions to issues that were present and being ignored by Doug. I genuinely looked to find a solution to the proposal, such as it was. I was joined by a few other very bright guys, who used to participate on this list and they, also, offered their take on many of the design solutions that begged to be addressed.

Doug's response...? To belittle, berate and rudely ignore that which was so obvious that it amounted to a bleeding child left in the street while wonder boy twiddled around with more complicated additions that took the concept far away from its intended goals.

I don't care if Doug is a doofus of grand proportions. It's his life. What I do care about is the fact that he routinely lumps persons from the foiling and general boat design field in some arbitrary bag of disregard. He's personally and rudely offended at least five World Champions in various classes of sailing and dumped on as many well-known designers of highly regarded and actively sailed craft. He has completely ignored, as well as aggressively attacked, the offerings of other extremely seasoned sailors with vast levels of experience in areas of which he has not one drop of knowledge.

In short, Wayne, the man is well off the scale when it comes to a person with decent and respectful interactive skills. He has made the bed in which he resides on these Fora and it is evidenced by having been abruptly and unceremoniously kicked out of Forums on several occasions. One does not get banned for being a good Forum citizen, Wayne.

Over on Sailing Anarchy, he's presently physically threatening the current Moth World Champion, as well as a journalist, simply because they said they'd like to drop by his home when next in Florida so that they could take a look at his so-called work in progress. A work, mind you, that he has hoisted as the next coming of Jesus for the foiling community. I've had offlist conversations with the editor/owner of the Sailing Anarchy site and Doug is sitting at the precipice of being permanently banned from that group, as well.

Now, what do you suppose that is all about?... the process of being banned from the most liberal, tolerant and free-swinging sailing Forum on the Internet?

I invite you to get a grip on how you interpret the behavior of your fellow members and do some homework on the topic before you start in with the "childish" commentary.

[ancient kayaker]

Drawing is a communication medium and lack of skills inhibit efficient communication. Doug’s word skills certainly exceed his drawings skills by a large margin. I don't want to make any personal comments other than that. There are too many words by far on this thread for the amount of information conveyed, so I will keep my comments short.

[waynemarlow]

Chris. So far today you have spent probably in excess of 3 hours writing on this particular Thread. How much do you charge clients for your time, now equate in dollars how much those 3 hours have cost you.

And for what, to try an belittle some verbose enthusiast of foiling. For the rest of the forum members you have offfered absolutely zilch, nothing of value to look at and disect, just the ramblings of some self appointed zealot.

You would have thought now after 5 years you would have learnt to discuss only the important issues and chill out on the rest.

By the way link me into SA on a foiling thread ( I can't really find any worthy of the read ) as I reckon I could tie up the rest of your day. :rolleyes:

[Paul B]

Doug’s word skills certainly exceed his drawings skills by a large margin.

I find both of The Lord's skill sets to be about equal.

[Doug Lord]

My sketch was just that -a sketch- quick illustration to give a basic idea of the concept. The only error that I am aware of is the labeling of the angles-which I correct each time I post it.Perhaps I should have done a full width illustration. The representation of the angles is correct as is the foil submergence etc. The concept, as I have described it, is correctly illustrated in the sketch for one half the boat......If you see something you think is in error please point it out to me.