IMOCA(OPEN) 60 Development

[Doug Lord]

Saffran was the first monohull keelboat outfitted with curved lifting foils and now the boat, a Verdier design, is being updated again. This excerpt from The Daily Sail:

Cool new technology fitted to Marc Guillemot's Safran IMOCA 60
Friday October 14th 2011, Author: Soazig Guého, Location: France

Safran, the French aerospace, defence and security giant have been once again putting their corporate weight behind Marc Guillemot and Yann Eliès' IMOCA 60 campaign for the Transat Jacques Vabre. In what is believed to be a world first, Safran has been fitted with a keel foil made from titanium...as well as an inertial guidance system and wiring worthy of an Airbus.

Since her launch, Safran has been sailing with her first keel (refitted after losing her second one in the 2008-2009 Vendée Globe), and it was time for it to be changed. Three materials - steel, carbon, and titanium – were studied taking into account three criteria: reliability, cost and performance. “Very early on, titanium appeared to be the best solution, particularly as there was a block available at Messier-Bugatti-Dowty," explained Jean-Marie de La Porte, the Safran IMOCA 60 Project Leader. “In the Group, we are used to working with titanium, as it is used in aeronautical engineering to build the landing gear, turbine blades and engine casings. Leading experts from the Safran Group became involved, like Jean-Michel de Monicault (Snecma), who monitored the technical aspects of the project and Sandra Andrieu (Messier-Bugatti-Dowty), who contributed her knowledge of this material.” The lead keel bulb was mechanically attached to the titanium keel foil.

Designer Guillaume Verdier comments: “As we always do, we weighed up the various criteria and ratios before choosing this aeronautical titanium.” Above all they needed to “take into account the qualities of the material and think of how to work with it. For example, with welding techniques using machines, which bombard it with beams of electrons. After that, this hollow keel meant we could lower still further the centre of gravity.”

Among the criteria the designer is referring to, there is one that is key for Marc Guillemot: “For me, the uppermost priority was reliability. That’s why we opted for a titanium keel. After that, and only after that consideration, we of course tried with Guillaume Verdier to find ways to improve hydrodynamic performance, reducing drag from the bulb and lowering once again the centre of gravity. That’s what we all attempt to do on our monohulls, as to keep it simple, the greater the weight down below, the better the performance and the more power we obtain. If we could, we would put it down below the keel!”

Inertial guidance system

Another innovation is the inertial guidance system, a technology developed by Sagem (Safran Group), one of the world’s leaders in this field. “It seemed obvious we should try to make use of this technology developed in the Group to work on our 60-foot boat,” explained Jean-Marie de La Porte. “This system, based on the gyroscopic effect, measures the boat’s movements in real time along three axes (rolling, yawing, pitching), and accelerations. Combining this data with other information such as the wind and steering angle, we can find out more about the performance of the boat in every sort of condition and then work to improve on that.” Rest of story: http://www.thedailysail.com/offshore...afran-imoca-60
------
http://www.imoca.org/en/

Transat Jacques-Vabre starting late October: http://www.transat-jacques-vabre.com/ (no English translation)

Photo: Ignacio Baixauli

click on image:

[Doug Lord]

Also awaiting the announcement of the first Open 60 to use Hugh Welbourns DSS: http://seahorsemagazine.com/2010-September/2.php

[Doug Lord]

Potential disaster for the most exciting and prolific development keelboat class in the world. The "Powers That Be" are considering eliminating development and changing the class rules to be a One Design!!! No!
----

An alternative to make the Class even more attractive(wrong!dl)

http://www.imoca.org/en/index.php/ne...it-son-avenir1

The Board presented the work it has done and the Meeting enabled members, skippers and owners to have their say. The discussions were very constructive and dignified. It was logical too for the Class to hear from the leading race organisers, in other words the Vendée Globe and the Barcelona World Race, who were both favourable to a solution making it easier for racers, businesses and particularly smaller businesses to become involved. The IMOCA class has been thinking about changing its Open rules. Antoine Mermod, a member of the Board, presented some measures to simplify matters, significantly reducing the cost of boats while ensuring greater reliability. Having listened to these arguments, it became increasingly clear that by keeping Open rules, the Class continues to favour the development of boats. But experience shows that that the constraints are huge, with progress costing a lot and with real gains often seen as minute.
That is why the Board has come up with the idea of looking at a one-design alternative. This solution would certainly have an effect on costs, reliability and, of course, competitiveness. The goal that is being put forward is to cut costs by 30% a year without any loss in performance and competitiveness. The Open rules enabled some amazing and fantastic changes to occur, but today to win, it is not enough to be a talented skipper, as you also need an exceptional technical team bringing together specialists and engineers every day.

Such a change cannot be adopted in any case without taking into account the viability of the current fleet, which includes six new boats as we move forward to the next Vendée Globe. That is why the IMOCA Class has decided to give everyone, racers and owners, time to think about these changes. The first decisions are due to be taken in January 2012 with the aim of ensuring the best possible future for the Class.

[Doug Lord]

Big news-at least to me: some Open 60's are now using the keel strut as a
foil and not just as a strut. They do this by angling up the axis of rotation-up to 7.5 degrees on one boat!

From Scuttlebutt Europe today:

Michel Desjoyeaux Looks at the New Boats

Michel Desjoyeaux: There are two boats I know particularly well, of course. My old Foncia 2, now in the hands of Armel Le Cleac'h under the name of Banque Populaire and Francois Gabart's new boat (Macif). For me, they're more or less the same, with just a few minor differences. Personally I believe they are the boats that have made the most of the constraints imposed when the class rules were last modified, in particular concerning the maximum righting moment. Because we stuck with Farr rudders, they are very light at the helm. That means you don't have to give the autopilots too much work and you consume less energy."

What about the new Virbac-Paprec 3?
MD: "Jean-Pierre Dick's boat is part of the same family. We're talking about the same generation of boat, with a hull design which is similar to what you find with Macif and the old Foncia. We're looking at more or less the same type of appendage design. I think the performance of these three boats will be very close. After that, fortunately a lot of what happens in terms of performance is down to the sailor and the way he sails his boat."

What about the brand new Kouyoumdjian designed Cheminees Poujoulat?
MD: "I can't really say much about her, as I haven't seen her sailing that much, but I'm not convinced by the idea of moving back the position of the cockpit in light conditions. She's certainly going to be very demanding for her skipper (Bernard Stamm) and not that comfortable, as the big bow section does not cut through the water that easily."

What are the differences between the new PRB and Safran?
MD: "If we're talking about Vincent Riou's new PRB, it's a bit different, as she is basically the 2009 IMOCA Class rules version of Marc Guillemot's Safran, but with a 70 cm shorter mast and with outriggers, which means a difference in performance: in theory, PRB is likely to be less at ease in light conditions than Safran, but the advantage will be the other way around in stronger winds, as in these conditions, the new PRB will not have that extra bit of mast, which serves no purpose."

An example of the changes that have occurred with the most recent boats?
MD: "The angle that has been given to the axis of rotation for the keel. The front part is higher up, which means that the keel is angled and can be seen as a foil, which helps lift the boat up. On the Farr designed boats this angle was 2 degrees, but 5 on Safran and now we're up to 7.5." *
So in conclusion?
MD: "If we had to place the boats in order the newer projects would come out on top, but the sailors are good enough to cope with the difference between their boats. During the training sessions, those with good boats were able to do well and sail well all the time. Banque Populaire is very much at ease with Armel Le Cleac'h for example. Francois Gabart and Macif still have a bit of a way to go, but that's only normal."www.vendeeglobe.org
------

* This I don't understand: you've got lead at the outboard end of the canting keel to develop righting moment by pulling down, and here you make the keel a lifting foil pulling up -cancelling out some of the RM from the canted keel? Doesn't make sense-must be a misprint or mis-report? CBTFco/Bill Burns and team patented a system using a flap on the keel strut to change it into a foil pulling down-in the same direction as the lead. They said it could add substantial righting moment but this baffles me........
Unless maybe they do it on a reach where they don't need all the RM from the keel and cancelling some of the RM from the canted keel also reduces weight. But what about upwind?

[sharpii2]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

Potential disaster for the most exciting and prolific development keelboat class in the world. The "Powers That Be" are considering eliminating development and changing the class rules to be a One Design!!! No!
----

An alternative to make the Class even more attractive(wrong!dl)

http://www.imoca.org/en/index.php/ne...it-son-avenir1

The Board presented the work it has done and the Meeting enabled members, skippers and owners to have their say. The discussions were very constructive and dignified. It was logical too for the Class to hear from the leading race organisers, in other words the Vendée Globe and the Barcelona World Race, who were both favourable to a solution making it easier for racers, businesses and particularly smaller businesses to become involved. The IMOCA class has been thinking about changing its Open rules. Antoine Mermod, a member of the Board, presented some measures to simplify matters, significantly reducing the cost of boats while ensuring greater reliability. Having listened to these arguments, it became increasingly clear that by keeping Open rules, the Class continues to favour the development of boats. But experience shows that that the constraints are huge, with progress costing a lot and with real gains often seen as minute.
That is why the Board has come up with the idea of looking at a one-design alternative. This solution would certainly have an effect on costs, reliability and, of course, competitiveness. The goal that is being put forward is to cut costs by 30% a year without any loss in performance and competitiveness. The Open rules enabled some amazing and fantastic changes to occur, but today to win, it is not enough to be a talented skipper, as you also need an exceptional technical team bringing together specialists and engineers every day.

Such a change cannot be adopted in any case without taking into account the viability of the current fleet, which includes six new boats as we move forward to the next Vendée Globe. That is why the IMOCA Class has decided to give everyone, racers and owners, time to think about these changes. The first decisions are due to be taken in January 2012 with the aim of ensuring the best possible future for the Class.

I agree that one design is not the way to go.

But certain design limitations may be called for.

Limitations on the canting keel assembly might be a good place to start.

Outlawing or limiting how much it can change its angle of attack would be a good place to start. Outlawing expensive materials that only certain competitors may have access to, such as aircraft grade titanium might be another.

Either that or a cafeteria approach might work. With this you can use one expensive technology at the expense of not using another. This would go further to bring about real innovation, as it would encourage a wider diversity of designs which, in theory, will all cost roughly the same.

For instance: if you have a titanium strut, you will not be allowed to change its angle of attack. Something like that.

The problem with a true 'open' class is the open wallet it takes to be competitive in it.

IMHO, design restrictions are the key to keeping the cost down, without resorting to a one design.

I have also considered the idea of retro-handicapping.

This is different than regular handicapping in that only boats that have been previously built (before the handicap comes into effect) can benefit from it.

Building a boat specifically to take advantage of such handicap would not be allowed. This is to prevent a 'beat the handicap, not the other boat' strategy.

Newer boats will be expected to be faster than older ones, as a class develops, so the older boats will need this relief in order to stay competitive.

A system like this would also discourage expensive design elements which improve performance only marginally.