![]() |
Geometry 101
What is the largest triangle (area) that can be fitted into an area bounded by the boom, mast (between gooseneck and backstay crane), backstay crane and backstay? This is basically the problem that is causing such a kafuffle in a few other threads here. Well actually it's not going to be a triangle because the boom does not extend to the backstay. We can increase the area bit by bowing out the leech of the sail to just reach the backstay at a point roughly perpendicular from the position of the clew on the boom, this is roach. For structural reasons the top of the headboard is not pointed but rather chopped of parallel to the foot and this is partly why the backstay is carried aft of the mast head by the crane, allowing the head board to hoist a bit higher. Now hear is the rub: If we lower the headboard by a foot and increase the curvature of the roach to meet the headboard at the new lower position we REDUCE the area of the main. The roach, expressed as a percentage of the area of the main increases. This happens for two reasons: 1) The leech is now at a position further forward of the old on, so the distance from the point of maximum roach to the line connecting the clew and head is a bit larger. 2) The area of the triangle defined by luff, foot, and line connecting clew to head is now smaller. Consequently the roach percentage rises. BUT, the overall area of the sail is LESS! Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? Cheers Marty |
Geometry 101
"Martin Baxter" wrote in message ... What is the largest triangle (area) that can be fitted into an area bounded by the boom, mast (between gooseneck and backstay crane), backstay crane and backstay? This is basically the problem that is causing such a kafuffle in a few other threads here. Well actually it's not going to be a triangle because the boom does not extend to the backstay. We can increase the area bit by bowing out the leech of the sail to just reach the backstay at a point roughly perpendicular from the position of the clew on the boom, this is roach. For structural reasons the top of the headboard is not pointed but rather chopped of parallel to the foot and this is partly why the backstay is carried aft of the mast head by the crane, allowing the head board to hoist a bit higher. Now hear is the rub: If we lower the headboard by a foot and increase the curvature of the roach to meet the headboard at the new lower position we REDUCE the area of the main. The roach, expressed as a percentage of the area of the main increases. This happens for two reasons: 1) The leech is now at a position further forward of the old on, so the distance from the point of maximum roach to the line connecting the clew and head is a bit larger. 2) The area of the triangle defined by luff, foot, and line connecting clew to head is now smaller. Consequently the roach percentage rises. BUT, the overall area of the sail is LESS! Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? I don't know, but all the racing boats I've seen are. Scotty |
Geometry 101
Martin Baxter wrote:
What is the largest triangle (area) that can be fitted into an area bounded by the boom, mast (between gooseneck and backstay crane), backstay crane and backstay? Clearly, the largest sail area can be achieved by completely filling in that triangle... or by thinking "outside the box" and ignoring the artificial limit imposed by the backstay. Some boats have sails that overlap the backstay, other boats don't have a backstay at all. This is basically the problem that is causing such a kafuffle in a few other threads here. No kafuffle, just Bobsprit showing his ignorance. Now hear is the rub: If we lower the headboard by a foot and increase the curvature of the roach to meet the headboard at the new lower position we REDUCE the area of the main. The roach, expressed as a percentage of the area of the main increases. This happens for two reasons: 1) The leech is now at a position further forward of the old on, so the distance from the point of maximum roach to the line connecting the clew and head is a bit larger. 2) The area of the triangle defined by luff, foot, and line connecting clew to head is now smaller. Consequently the roach percentage rises. Yep. One of the consequences of being able to make sails with higher roach than before is that more classes are defining a mid-girth measurement for all sails. BUT, the overall area of the sail is LESS! Did you confirm this with a licensed rocket surgeon? Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? A DUCK!! DSK |
Geometry 101
BUT, the overall area of the sail is LESS!
Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? The hoist of my sail is about 4.5 inches short according to the specs from Beneteau USA and the original sail. The roach is 8.5%. The old sail head went to a fairly sharp point and had little or no roach. The new sail has a broader headboard and so that "point" is missing. The loss of sail area at the top is not even a single square foot. Lying both sails on top of eachother revealed the foot to about the same, but the roach was far greater than the original 35s5 sail. There is no doubt that the new kevlar sail is larger...none at all. I think you're working out the geometry based on cutting at the foot, which would result in a great loss of sail area. Visualize a triangle. Cut a foot off the base is far more area than a foot off the tip. Being a large mained fractional rig, this current sail was found to be excellent both in this material and the less exotic version it was coppied from...that sail being from North. After posting all of the pics, talking with my loft and checking the main at Doyle there is no doubt....except in the small mind of Sloco. As far as the black band goes, my 35s5 has none. When we hoisted the main we were positive it was hoisting further up that the original main, which was odd. Again, none of this matters in the least. RB 35s5 NY |
Geometry 101
Martin Baxter wrote:
What is the largest triangle (area) that can be fitted into an area bounded by the boom, mast (between gooseneck and backstay crane), backstay crane and backstay? This is basically the problem that is causing such a kafuffle in a few other threads here. Well actually it's not going to be a triangle.... Actualy, yes it is. The largest triangle is obviously going to be a triangle. Read your question again. Now, I don't know why you are concerned with triangles, because sails aren't triangles. //Walt |
Geometry 101
DSK wrote:
Martin Baxter wrote: What is the largest triangle (area) that can be fitted into an area bounded by the boom, mast (between gooseneck and backstay crane), backstay crane and backstay? Clearly, the largest sail area can be achieved by completely filling in that triangle... or by thinking "outside the box" and ignoring the artificial limit imposed by the backstay. Some boats have sails that overlap the backstay, other boats don't have a backstay at all. Sorry, I should have specified that going outside the defined area was not permited for this excercise. Yep. One of the consequences of being able to make sails with higher roach than before is that more classes are defining a mid-girth measurement for all sails. BUT, the overall area of the sail is LESS! Did you confirm this with a licensed rocket surgeon? Indeed, Dr. Who no less, he offered to put a new black band on Bob's boat with his sonic screwdriver! Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? A DUCK!! DSK |
Geometry 101
"Capt. Rob" wrote:
BUT, the overall area of the sail is LESS! Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? The hoist of my sail is about 4.5 inches short according to the specs from Beneteau USA and the original sail. The roach is 8.5%. The old sail head went to a fairly sharp point and had little or no roach. The new sail has a broader headboard and so that "point" is missing. The loss of sail area at the top is not even a single square foot. Lying both sails on top of eachother revealed the foot to about the same, but the roach was far greater than the original 35s5 sail. There is no doubt that the new kevlar sail is larger...none at all. I think you're working out the geometry based on cutting at the foot, which would result in a great loss of sail area. Visualize a triangle. Cut a foot off the base is far more area than a foot off the tip. Being a large mained fractional rig, this current sail was found to be excellent both in this material and the less exotic version it was coppied from...that sail being from North. After posting all of the pics, talking with my loft and checking the main at Doyle there is no doubt....except in the small mind of Sloco. As far as the black band goes, my 35s5 has none. When we hoisted the main we were positive it was hoisting further up that the original main, which was odd. Again, none of this matters in the least. Holy Backpedal! Now it hoists higher on your boat, so you must have a shorter than standard mast, or the Bennies in all those photos you posted have higher than starndard masts. Cheers Marty |
Geometry 101
Walt wrote:
Martin Baxter wrote: What is the largest triangle (area) that can be fitted into an area bounded by the boom, mast (between gooseneck and backstay crane), backstay crane and backstay? This is basically the problem that is causing such a kafuffle in a few other threads here. Well actually it's not going to be a triangle.... Actualy, yes it is. The largest triangle is obviously going to be a triangle. Read your question again. My question defines an area bounded by for sides, a quadrangle, I suppose I should said "plane geometric shape" rather than "triangle", sorry for the confusion. Now, I don't know why you are concerned with triangles, because sails aren't triangles. Ummm, that's why I said "Well actually it's not going to be a triangle...." //Walt |
Geometry 101
Holy Backpedal! Now it hoists higher on your boat, so you must have a shorter than standard mast, or the Bennies in all those photos you posted have higher than starndard masts. My story has remained the same, and every photo of a 35s5 I can find supports what I've said. The hoist on EVERY 35s5 looks a bit short to me, including the one I just got. But it does appear higher than my old sail. My old hoist looks about the same as this... http://home.att.net/~captnerdo/images/Footloos.gif But the new sail is more like this.... http://www.lakeontario300.org/images...windriven1.jpg Then this Frers 51 seems to have a hoist a good 6 inches short... http://www.lakeontario300.org/images...s/toscana1.jpg and does this Express 30 main look short? Because it is! http://www.lakeontario300.org/images...nts/tigger.jpg But check the hoist on this C&C 99! I think it's almost above the mast! http://www.lakeontario300.org/images...nchurchill.jpg Does it really matter, Martin? Do you think my Kevlar main is going to slow us down? RB 35s5 NY |
Geometry 101
Martin Baxter wrote:
Walt wrote: Martin Baxter wrote: What is the largest triangle (area) that can be fitted into an area bounded by the boom, mast (between gooseneck and backstay crane), backstay crane and backstay? Well actually it's not going to be a triangle.... Actualy, yes it is. The largest triangle is obviously going to be a triangle. Read your question again. My question defines an area bounded by for sides, a quadrangle, I suppose I should said "plane geometric shape" rather than "triangle", sorry for the confusion. OK. If you mean "polygon" please say "polygon". Now, I don't know why you are concerned with triangles, because sails aren't triangles. Ummm, that's why I said "Well actually it's not going to be a triangle...." Fair enough. But I don't know why you are concerned with polygons, or quadrangles, because sails aren't polygons or quadrangles. (Or quadralaterals either, if you object to an obsolete definition of quadrangle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrangle ) |
Geometry 101
My question defines an area bounded by for sides, a quadrangle, I
suppose I should said "plane geometric shape" rather than "triangle", sorry for the confusion. Walt wrote: OK. If you mean "polygon" please say "polygon". Isn't a triangle a polygon? Anyway, what is the point in using plane geometry to analyse sails? They are not flat. One way to maximize sail area would be to make the sails more spherical, with boundaries defined by the limits of the above-mentioned polygon. DSK |
Geometry 101
DSK wrote:
My question defines an area bounded by for sides, a quadrangle, I suppose I should said "plane geometric shape" rather than "triangle", sorry for the confusion. Walt wrote: OK. If you mean "polygon" please say "polygon". Isn't a triangle a polygon? Yes it is. Anyway, what is the point in using plane geometry to analyse sails? They are not flat. Bingo. We've got a winner. Sails aren't triangles. Or Quadralaterals. Or any other object from plane geometry. One way to maximize sail area would be to make the sails more spherical, with boundaries defined by the limits of the above-mentioned polygon. Cool. Then you could make them out of leather from your spherical cow. //Walt |
Geometry 101
DSK wrote: Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? A DUCK!! So this is the black band you've been talking about. http://www.thom.org/gallery/animals/duck/ |
Geometry 101
"Martin Baxter" wrote in message ... Did you confirm this with a licensed rocket surgeon? Indeed, Dr. Who no less, he offered to put a new black band on Bob's boat with his sonic screwdriver! Ha ha, before last Friday, I wouldn't have known what you were talking about. SBV |
Geometry 101
Walt wrote:
DSK wrote: My question defines an area bounded by for sides, a quadrangle, I suppose I should said "plane geometric shape" rather than "triangle", sorry for the confusion. Walt wrote: OK. If you mean "polygon" please say "polygon". Isn't a triangle a polygon? Yes it is. Anyway, what is the point in using plane geometry to analyse sails? They are not flat. Bingo. We've got a winner. Sails aren't triangles. Or Quadralaterals. Or any other object from plane geometry. Jumpin' Jiminy, let's see if get a bit more sophomoric! It was merely an approximation meant to illustrate the thought that if you start with sail that fits the mast/boat combination correctly, and comes close to but does not touch the backstay when tacking/jybing, a sail with a shorter luff that fits the rest of the criteria will have LESS area. Cheers Marty |
Geometry 101
Martin Baxter wrote:
Jumpin' Jiminy, let's see if get a bit more sophomoric! OK, you go first .... It was merely an approximation meant to illustrate the thought that if you start with sail that fits the mast/boat combination correctly, and comes close to but does not touch the backstay when tacking/jybing, a sail with a shorter luff that fits the rest of the criteria will have LESS area. Less is more. Ignorance is strength. DSK |
Geometry 101
Scotty wrote:
Ha ha, before last Friday, I wouldn't have known what you were talking about. What happened last Friday? DSK |
Geometry 101
"DSK" wrote in message . .. Scotty wrote: Ha ha, before last Friday, I wouldn't have known what you were talking about. What happened last Friday? I'm sworn to secrecy. SBV |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:58 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com