DCockey
Participant
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2009
- Posts
- 5,309
- Reaction score
- 682
- Location
- Midcoast Maine
A basic of aerodynamics and hydrodynamics: As long as the flow around a symmetric foil section remains attached the lift for a given angle of attack will be the same independent of the section thickness and shape. The lift for a given angle of attack will only depend on the dimensions and planform shape (to within a very small amount). A thicker section will usually result in the flow staying attached at a higher angle of attack, but will have higher drag at lower angles of attack. Maximum angle of attack for attached flow will also depend on thickness and section shape. Drag will also depend on thickness and section shape.does a foil scaled only on the y axis, i.e. making a section of it thicker without increasing chord length, produce useful lift
Lift is not due to the details of the foil section. In fact a flat plate with a rounded leading edge and a tapered trailing edge will produce as much lift as a wing with an "airfoil" section at sufficiently low angles of attack.
Option 1 will have the highest drag for a given lift.Option #1 is what I'm thinking about here. This is probably the most straightforward modification from a fabrication standpoint.
Option #2 has the "bulb" area foil shape scaled symmetrically, maintain the NACA 0012 proportions of the original keel foil so the "bulb" section becomes longer in chord. My assumption would be that this does produce useful lift but with somewhat increase in drag, too. Similar in concept to the First 27 Seascape keel. Probably the best option hydrodynamically? but I'm not sure I want to commit to changing the underwater profile/CLR that much. Also the most difficult in terms of fabrication.
Option #3 is a slightly more extreme version of what you described from the earlier Ranger 26, where the keel section is thicker at tip and blends to a thinner root, this just makes the transition more quickly. This might be reasonable from a fabrication standpoint, seems fairly conservative from a design standpoint, and does restore a fair amount of the original foil "working" area, while lowering VCG without adding more weight.
Option 2 will have slightly lower drag for a given lift than option 1.
Both options 1 and 2 could be improved by rounding the sharp corners.
I'm not willing to say anything about option 3 without doing some research.
A keel with a rounded bulb with very smooth transition to the straight portion of the keel would probably have the lowest drag for a given lift.