Scott Dufour wrote: Hey Eric,
Referencing Sleive's files, I have to ask the question:
Doesn't your approach - at least in step 1 - put the curve at exactly the wrong spot? The aft section of the sail is usually kept as flat as possible because a hook in that area contributes mostly drag. It's camber in the forward 1/3 that makes the lift to windward.
Michael - are your forward sheets constantly getting hung up on something?
Bonjour Scott
Sorry I missed that answer.
The idea is not to add some camber at the rear but to limit the camber at the rear when the wind is increasing. It allows more flexible battens in light airs. I'm convinced that, while efficient, rigids battens are contradiction to the natural adaptative flexibility of junk rig.
The main issue I (re)found is that you can't have flexible battens on the forward part of the sail. It leads to "S bending" (PJR fig 1.8) (I tried and it is not confortable). At best, with a flat sail, with a rigidified fisrt third forward batten, you optain a flat entry (where you would like to have camber), a cambered middle third (similar bu smoother to articulated battens) and a rather flat third rear area (which is good). It's far from optimum. It may be improved by a forward barrel-cut for example.
But the flat sail is not the point. The point is the junkwing ; with a thick rigid profile (build up out of flexible battens maintained by a limited structure), around the mast, on the first two thirds of the batten and a lambda sheeting at the end of the wishbone part and at the rear in order to use the rear third of the sail to provide the profile camber.
I tried it on the demonstator, in light wind, and it worked very well.
I tried it on the ground in heavy wind (25-30 kts gusting) and the very light build sail was not too bumpy and resisted well.
The next step will be to build a sail for Mingming and try it at sea....
Eric