The stub takes the mast bearings and it is required to have a certain length to reduce the bearing load. It is likely that deeper bury in the hull and shorter stub would work out well but the bending moment in each stub is twice the moment carried by each beam. That is on the basis that a single mast can produce the overturning moment while the righting moment is shared between the beams providing the hull is torsionally stiff.
I once analysed the possibility of using a slew ring for a mast base but the size is impractical.
The brace would not be a large section so it would be faired to keep attached flow so little to no spray from that.
On 24/04/2016, at 1:03 AM, "lucjdekeyser@telenet.be [harryproa]" <harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au> wrote:
Could you turn the attachments upside down and replace the lower one with an one higher up the mast stub instead ? The advantages are that the brace is not producing spray from hitting even low waves (with Farriers I suppose the spray does not get from under the main hull much) and that the brace up can double as a rail, eliminating the need to add stanchions and such.
__._,_.___
Posted by: Rick Willoughby <rickwill@bigpond.net.au>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a new topic | • | Messages in this topic (57) |
.