Maxi 77 junk rig conversion

  • 01 Jun 2024 01:06
    Reply # 13364380 on 13226713


    I find that one of the unusual aspects of sailing junk rig, rather than gaff or bermudian, is that I tend to reef when I turn off the wind and shake the reefs out as I sail closer to the wind.  

    You might still be in the mindset where shaking out the reef as the wind comes forward of the beam is the opposite of what feels right.  When in doubt, shake it out: it's easier enough to put back in if you've been too enthusiastic!

  • 31 May 2024 14:07
    Reply # 13364083 on 13363436
    Arne wrote:

    I guess Paul S has made the forward batten pockets a bit longer than those on Boudicca, to let him further increase the mast balance.

    Yes, indeed! I shifted the batten pocket gap aft, by some 10-20 cm if I remember correctly
  • 31 May 2024 10:41
    Reply # 13363985 on 13363980
    As for tacking angle in light winds, there are two possible reasons for that:
    • Tacking angle on the chart will always be worse in light winds than in strong winds, since the headwind (boat speed) component is relatively stronger than in stronger winds. We don't sail twice as fast in 12kts winds as in 6kts.
    • Some fine keels may lose grip in lighter winds. My former boat, Johanna was not so good in that respect.

    Arne

     Ah, this is not what I meant. I mean sailing with too less sail area for a given wind, i.e. reefeing too much and thus being "too" slow.
  • 31 May 2024 10:26
    Reply # 13363983 on 13226713

    By the way, love the junk sailing: being able to post here, while navigating in these tight waters

    1 file
  • 31 May 2024 10:21
    Reply # 13363981 on 13363980
    Good  -  and you of course remembered to subtract the thickness of the battens? 
    Of course not, shame on me. Then it is 9.0%. Will correct my post below!

    Those 23.3% mast balance, is that before or after you latest adjustment?

    Before. Did not increase balance yet.
  • 31 May 2024 10:10
    Reply # 13363980 on 13363969
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
    Paul S wrote:

    Just measured:

    Camber: 9.6% (47 cm at 490 cm chord length), measured at position of max camber

    Balance: 23,3% (114 cm at 490 cm chord length)


    Arne, I guess my camber is a bit higher then your estimation because I slackened the batten tension quite a bit (you proposed 2-4cm. Probably I overdid it a bit and went for 4-6cm). However, I'm quite happy with that increased amount of camber.


    Good  -  and you of course remembered to subtract the thickness of the battens? 
    Those 23.3% mast balance, is that before or after you latest adjustment?

    As for tacking angle in light winds, there are two possible reasons for that:

    • Tacking angle on the chart will always be worse in light winds than in strong winds, since the headwind (boat speed) component is relatively stronger than in stronger winds. We don't sail twice as fast in 12kts winds as in 6kts.
    • Some fin-keels may lose grip in lighter winds. My former boat, Johanna was not so good in that respect.

    Arne

    Last modified: 25 Jul 2024 18:38 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 31 May 2024 09:24
    Reply # 13363971 on 13226713

    And thanks, Graham and Scott for your kind words!


    The easy tacking in narrow channels really come in handy for me right now, navigating through the swedish archipelagos.


     On that appended track one can see that the tack angles are not that good. We were underpowered, not going as fast as the wind would allow. My observation from the last weeks is, that Ilvy is quite sensible on being underpowered. Unfortunately I cannot tell if it is because of the junk rig, as I did not check the gps course that frantically with the original bermuda rig...  Could also just be the hull shape of her. 

    Does anyone else observe this sensibility to windward abilities with being underpowered, too?

    1 file
  • 31 May 2024 09:14
    Reply # 13363970 on 13226713

    Arne, another reason for the (rather little) deviation of your and Ketils camber to mine could be, that we used different curves: as I read it, you used a bending wooden spline, whereas I used CAD. In principle the same, however in practice some deviation would be expectable.

    It might be interesting to compare those curves. Do you have any foto from above of your curve? We could easily put my drawing on top and compare (though it would admitedly be rather academic).


    Cheers,

    Paul

  • 31 May 2024 09:08
    Reply # 13363969 on 13226713

    Just measured:

    Camber: 9.0% (44 cm at 490 cm chord length), measured at position of max camber

    Balance: 23,3% (114 cm at 490 cm chord length)


    Arne, I guess my camber is a bit higher then your estimation because I slackened the batten tension quite a bit (you proposed 2-4cm. Probably I overdid it a bit and went for 4-6cm). However, I'm quite happy with that increased amount of camber.

    1 file
    Last modified: 31 May 2024 10:22 | Anonymous member
  • 30 May 2024 22:25
    Reply # 13363824 on 13363422
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
    Graham wrote:Hey Paul, that is a beautifully-setting sail.  I'd be interested to know what your camber is.  I am interested in the relationship between camber and displacement, and what people like Arne, Paul Thompson etc, think is the ideal ratio.  I'm envious, looking at all these beautiful junk sails.  I'm looking for a cheap, suitable, fibreglass boat between 26-28' (8-9m), with moderate displacement, as I do not think my current boat is right for the project.


    Camber and sail area versus displacement.


    Graham, I cannot say that I have found that ideal general ratio between camber and displacement. I used to say that heavy displacement boats should have more camber than the others, but these days I am not so sure. Maybe on auxiliary rigs mainly meant for reaching and running...


    For my own boats I have settled on 8% (real, measured) camber, as this has proven to both be close-winded and easy to keep in that groove between luffing and stalling. In addition, this modest camber (compared to genoas with 12-15%) works well as the wind picks up. Remember, the camber in a junksail cannot be adjusted under way. What can be easily adjusted is the sail area, so I generally rig generously. This extra sail area gives a nice long luff (including the 60-70° head) for improved upwind performance, but also spreads out a big nice area for running before.
    Then, while the Bermudan sailors flatten their sails in rising winds, I drop a panel (..or three...).

    Paul S. has demonstrated this beyond any doubt with his generously rigged Maxi. That sail was originally meant for a much heavier boat.

    Soo, if I after all dare present a rig size and camber strategy, it may look about like this:

    ·         Decide how tall and heavy mast(s) the boat can carry in the conditions it is likely to meet. The answer depends on what material the mast is to be made of. This again depends on what is available at a tolerable cost. I try to keep the mast below 3% of the boat’s weight.

    ·         Then, rig as big a sail as possible.

    ·         As said, I stick with the 8% camber in the lower panels, as this is easy to make with the barrel cut method (plus Amateur Method B). The top panels are made progressively flatter, but never completely flat (..the top panel on Paul’s Maxi has a 44mm Round at both the yard and top batten...).

    I hope this makes some sense...

    Cheers,
    Arne


    Last modified: 31 May 2024 07:17 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software