|Subject: Re: [harryproa] Re: Schooner v. Unarig|
|From: "Rob Denney" <email@example.com>|
|Date: 12/3/2006, 8:40 AM|
----- Original Message -----From: Herb DessonSent: Friday, December 01, 2006 5:27 PMSubject: [harryproa] Re: Schooner v. Unarig
I am not quite sure what to make of the smaller sail area, but I think
it is clear that in any given weather there will be less force on each
mast for the schooner than for the single mast of the sloop.
Agreed, but the design load is still that force required to capsize the boat, so they have to be as strong as the single mast. The same applies to the hull reinforcing. Supporting each mast at the end of the beam is very easy. However, if only one sail is doing the work, the hull has to be strong enough to transmit this load to the other beam, so ends up the same as if the mast was in the middle.
I look forward to seing the results of your calculations. I know FEA
costs money, but would it be possible to include an analysis of
exactly the same sail shape to get comparability? I am not sure how
comparable a jibless schooner is to a balestron sloop from a weight
point of view. My first thought is that it wouldn't make much
difference, but clearly my first thoughts are not very reliable in
You ain't kidding about the cost of FEA! I can't afford to get into sail shape anaysis. We engineer the mast based on the scenarios it sees. The ballestron rig and the schooner would be pretty close to the same weight.
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.14.6/536 - Release Date: 11/16/2006