The join up high would definitely add more weight aloft. However,
I'd personally be more comfortable with the join up high because the
stresses are so much lower up there. Perhaps even just above the
jib halyard, if that will allow the mast to fit into a container.
I believe the Weta has a stayed mast, so the stresses on the spar
are more evenly distributed, and are probably greatest in the
center. The unstayed mast on a proa would have its highest stresses
at the base, so the further you get from that base, the less force a
join has to deal with.
I don't know where the sweet spot would be. The higher you go,
the lower the stresses are, but the more heeling moment you add.
For a non-telescoping unstayed mast, does anyone have ideas about
where an ideal location for a join might be?
That Weta definitely looks like a fun boat. I've never seen one,
but have always enjoyed reading about it.
- Mike
bjarthur123 wrote:
the Weta trimaran has a two part mast. the join is about 1/3 of the way from the BOTTOM, not top. i assume that is to minimize weight aloft. are there pros/cons to having the join near/above/below the jib halyard exit?
ben
weta #358 "gray matter"
ithaca, new york
> MAST
>
> There are definitely good reasons for going with an easyrig, cost
> included. But with one mast, it might be tough to get the sail area you
> want for those light Chesapeake summer winds. If so, I'm starting to
> come around to the idea of a two-part mast. I personally can't get on
> board with a telescoping mast until I see one work for a while, but
> there's no reason why a two-part mast couldn't work. If the join were
> in the upper third, or even upper fourth, you could avoid most of the
> stresses in the mast. The biggest trick would be in making sure the
> sail can easily pass by the joint.