Built in safety factor beam still sees less force than weight dominant windward hull.
Referring to a different force. Aw I see that too, Its marginal if all is rigid and designed to function taking that into consideration, Lee float skips across waters surface very little torsional load its a float not a hull.
Todd
--- In harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au, Rob Denney <harryproa@...> wrote:
>
> Great example of what? I have no idea what their beams are made of, but if
> they are only sized for lifting the windward hull, they will break if the
> boat is ever caught seriously aback. Both boats are owner built and
> designed, so this may be a risk they are happy with. As I am selling my
> designs, it would not be an acceptable risk to me.
>
> Your drawings are both correct, but not what I am referring to, which is the
> twisting from the forward component of the drive. This is the force that
> causes the bow to pitch down (nose diving).
>
> Pitching the lee hull bow down, with the rig on it and the windward hull
> flying (to make it more obvious) puts less twisting loads on the beam than
> nosediving the lee hull with the mast in the ww hull.
>
> rob
>
> rob
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 4:56 AM, tsstproa <bitme1234@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Here's a great example...
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH8lv0_CYxA&feature=related
> >
> > Todd
> >
> >
> >
>