Canting Keel Trainer

Roy_Langbord · January 23, 2004, 12:11am

I’m really not sure where this has gotten too…

It would seem that this is another project to be added to the pile…

To hire someone to do the canting keel module design and testing would cost at least a few thousand dollars…

Someone could do it as a “labor of love” science project or as Dick suggests, maybe anyone interested can build whatever system they want and who knows what will happen…

In all events, it has to be designed, fitted into a boat, and tested…

And finally, it seems, as always, that Doug has some clear ideas how this is going to be done…

In all events, it doesn’t seem like anything will happen quickly or before the claimed arrival of the microsail CBTF boat. The success or failure of that project will really determine if there is any interest in a “strict one design” canting keel trainer…

So as to my vote, I abstain…

Peter_Stevens · January 23, 2004, 1:20am

It seems to be that nothing will be decided until we all tell Doug that his design concept is going be to be the best way to go. Every option for this boat that does not agree with Dougs’ plans is shoot down in flames by him. So Doug, start to build what you want, and we’ll all wait for it to hit the water as a working canting keel r/c boat. After it works the rest of us will then consider building our own boats. I’ll wait to see photos or video of it, but I won’t be holding my breath.
Eased Sheets Peter

system · January 23, 2004, 6:41am

I think rather than comments like Peters and Roys it might be better if people were to look closely and realistically at the idea.
For instance the B32 might work and may need to be sailed now in order to learn more about it.
----1)- If you add 30- 40 % more sail area and keep the fin the same length then there is a likelyhood of downwind diving.
----2) If you keep the sailarea the same and reduce weight the boat won’t float on its designed waterline. This will result in a shorter waterline and increased tendency to nose dive-probably-needs to be tested to know for sure.
----3)- If the sail area remains as is, the weight reduced and the fin left the same length then there would be no problem with the mechanics. BUT the question in two remains as does the question of the extra drag of the daggerboard that would be necessary. Perhaps the reduced wetted surface from the lighter boat would compensate for the increased wetted surface from the new fin?
----4)The kit would have to be looked at closely to see what problems would be encountered inmoving eiter the keel fin or the rig.(cont. below “Solution”)

SOLUTION: I’ve been working on this idea for the F100 and it was suggested by Will quite a while ago on his US ONE Meter. It is being used on a full size “Sydney Harbor Racer” called Bondi Tram. The idea is to put wings on the keel bulb instead of using a daggerboard. The wings are similar to the ones used on IACC boats but are there ,in this case, to develop lateral resistance when the keel cants. The good news is that they would cause no balance change and eliminate the need for installing a daggerboard in the hull and the resulting need to move the rig or keel fin.

One of them MUST move in order to keep the boat balanced.Since we know that the boat is probably well balanced now adding a daggrboard in front of or behind the keel fin will change the balance with both fins vertical and even more so as the keel starts to cant.

I'll make this offer: I will purchase the boat if someone that is INTERESTED in this concept will build it and ship the finished boat to me-after sailing it a couple of times.Use your own radio and then ship it without the radio.I don't have time to build now since I'm overwhelmed with production boats. If someone else will build the kit I'll order it today from George and have it shipped to them-I'll even supply a used Whirlwind or other sail winch and a rudder servo; they'll have to agree to ship the completed boat to me. If ,after I receive it and study it, it looks promising I would do a canting keel conversion to test and then we could ship it around....

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

Dick_Lemke · January 23, 2004, 11:56am

OK - now that we all have been “blinded” by the “only” concept/theory put forward, let me ask a very basic question…

Why are you promoting the idea of tilting the keel with the bulb? Once you move the keel from vertical, you must then add more drag and complexity by re-establishing the lost lateral resistance.

It will, in all probablility, be conssidered a personal attack, but what the hell - I’m interested to know why you would consider removing something (L.R.) only to have to come up with a way to put it back, adding more drag and complexity ! Certainly not a great “speed” idea.

Dick_Lemke · January 23, 2004, 12:00pm

<blockquote id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by lorsail

If someone else will build the kit I’ll order it today from George and have it shipped to them-I’ll even supply a used Whirlwind or other sail winch and a rudder servo; they’ll have to agree to ship the completed boat to me. If ,after I receive it and study it, it looks promising I would do a canting keel conversion to test and then we could ship it around…
<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”>

Are you looking for a “stock boat” to be built for you? You can probably ask George to build one and ship directly to you - or are you looking for a “personalized canting keel” version?

John_Storrow · January 23, 2004, 12:38pm

Dick-
To me personnally, and I don’t claim to know much about it, if there is more complexity, and you have to put back the lateral plane, so what. ITs and interesting Idea even if it turns out to not work better than a conventional boat. For this reason alone, it might be worth trying.
I call it the neato-coolo factor.

Dick_Lemke · January 23, 2004, 1:05pm

You missed my point John -

According to Doug’s theory/approach - you tilt the entire “foil” - that would be (without further definition) the foil shaped keel AND the lead bulb.

Then - according to Doug’s theory, when the keel is raised, (tilted) lateral resistance is lost, and the boat can side-slip. So to prevent that we now have to replace the lost lateral resistance and Doug’s theory (again) is to use some form (or combination thereof) of a daggerboard, a forward foil, or “wings” on the bulb - all in an effort to restore the lost lateral resistance, and prevent the boat from slipping sideways.

Unfortunately - and confirmed by Doug’s theories - adding any other appendages noted above - will increase the drag. Increased drag has always equated to slower speeds from all that I have read.

To my knowledge and personal belief, this is fairly accurate portrayal of the route that Doug wants us to go. I believe my above statements are based on fact, and that I haven’t misquoted Doug, Matt (not White) or Will - or anyone else.

My basic question - was why would you take something away (lateral resistance) only to have to figure out a way to restore it. And to date, that theory of Doug’s involves additional appendages, underwater and creating additional drag through the water. This is creativity and technology?

It kind of equates to building the lightest boat possible, but then adding a set of batteries to power the winch/servos that causes the boat to be several pounds over minimum (or optimum) weight. Not too many of us would elect “that” route as optimal for speed!

Gio · January 23, 2004, 2:08pm

I?m not sure I another opinion is needed in this discussion (and I?m not quite sure I want to get involved in it), but it seems to me that while the original idea ? a canting keel trainer ? had merit and sounded interesting the discussion that followed has degenerated into a mess (no offense to anyone, just lack of better words) that will lead to nowhere and with no real ?result? or ?lesson learned?. I had this tough from the beginning, instead of re-inventing the wheel, why not starting from what we have, what is available, now. Why re-engineering expensive F100 or trying to fit a canting contraption (again no offense) in some small and otherwise perfectly fine hull? [red]Or starting to design foils on the bulb, a nightmare on his own on those small boats.[/red] From what I gather the Ultimate Warrior has a canting keel, is been produced, sailed and we have pictures of it to prove it.
I?m not proposing to steal other people?s ideas or products, but why not talk to Grant McKinnon and figure out if a cheaper (2000 $ is way too much? on a personal note, it?s gold plated?) simpler ? 3 channel ? smaller version - if it?s possible, otherwise just cheaper would be ok - of his boat can be quickly produced and marketed? Would be this a possible solution?
For one I?m actually eager to see something like this sailing on a pond near me, it would be quite interesting and a nice challenge to sail ??..
Anyway, this in my 1 cent idea.

Gio

editing in red

John_Storrow · January 23, 2004, 3:49pm

Dick-
(Again I’m totally un-trained in this field)
(all-…sorry for the re-hash)
My crude understanding of Dougs theory is that the added righting moment on a boat of the same displacement gives more power to the sails. More power means more speed. Or, with added righting moment, dispacement can be reduced compared to an otherwise identical boat. Less displacement means less drag, I’ve always guessed. then of course you have to add lateral resistance which puts some, but perhaps not all, of the drag back. Perhaps a net loss of drag. Seems like your point is that there would be no net loss of drag?
Interesting

system · January 23, 2004, 3:50pm

Thanks for the post Gio. For those that have questions about how a canting keel works there are several posts explaining canting keels and the various forms of lateral resistance used with them on this forum in the “Technology” section.
No one has come forward relative to my previous post regarding the B32 so what I’m going to do when I can is put a canting keel system in a 24" hull I have here. It will be a 55 degree system moving center to 55 degrees in one second. It will use a Futaba 3801 servo to move the 10" keel fin and 1.2 Lb.s ballast and will use wings for lateral resistance. The rig will have around 200 sq.inches of sail and be reefable. Primarily this boat is being used to test a vastly simplified “solid state” canting keel mount and seal as well as the very simple canting mechanism I have just designed.
In a couple of months or so after the first F100’s are complete I will design a 30" version of the CK Trainer and build it.
Matthew Lingley is building a 30" version-more details from him later. Anyone is welcome to put together a prototype from 24" to 30". Pictures of my first test boat will be posted here; same with Matthews. Real world testing of this idea in a small boat is the best way to proceed I think.
For those still interested in the B32 please read my previous post.

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

Dick_Lemke · January 23, 2004, 4:05pm

<blockquote id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by lorsail

No one has come forward relative to my previous post regarding the B32

For those still interested in the B32 please read my previous post.

Doug - I have two questions to you that still reamin open. Are you/Can you please answer them?

are you looking for a pre-built “stock” boat - or one that has been modified with one of our canting keel ideas? Still open for an answer!
If you tilt the entire foil (keel) you have to go back and add in more appendages to retrieve the lost lateral Resistance!

Why are you tilting the entire foil in your attempts to move ballast? Still open for an answer!

Thanks - I think?

system · January 23, 2004, 4:29pm

Dick:

My offer on the B32 seems pretty clear: I’m willing to buy the kit(read the original post for more info) if somebody who is interested in this concept wants to build it and ship it to me. I don’t want to pay George to build it.If after I receive it and sail it it looks like a promising candidate for a canting keel I may convert it or refer it to someone else who is interested and skilled enough to do it.
2)-To avoid repetitive posts I refer you to the several discussions under “Technology” that lay down the basis of a canting keel and the rationale for the various forms of lateral resistance used.
I would also point out the large number of full size race boats from mini 6.5’s to Schock 40’s to Open 40’s ,50’s ,60’s and boats like the two newest max Z86’s, Genuine Risk, and numerous others who utilize canting keels + additional lateral resistance to produce speed. Not to mention Grunta’s outstanding Wind Warrior model the first production model canting keel yacht that also uses additional lateral resistance .
I’m curious if you didn’t understand the concept why you waited so long to mention it?

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

Dick_Lemke · January 23, 2004, 5:41pm

In your post, about the BH32 - you indicate someone should build, sail and THEN send it to you. This means that the deck will be in place, the keel trunk will be in place, and only a servo, receiver and a winch in place. A completely built boat means that “if” you should decide to proceed, you would have to rip off the deck and tear out the fixed keel in order to retro fit “your” idea of a canting keel mechanism. This could then lead to comments such as … “too much work to modify” … can’t remove item A, B or C without compromising the hull and it’s other components" - or “two servos and receiver were put in the wrong place and it’s going to take too much to modify it for my idea to fit” - … or maybe even some other excuse “why” you can’t get it to work.

As noted, I was considering three XL25’s for me and possibly my family, but then re-thought it after reading the specs on the BH32. Also much cheaper too.

If - on the other hand - you are looking for a “STOCK” trial horse boat which to sail and test against a modified one with a canting keel version to see if there really is a big difference, then I might consider a “loan” if I build one for my family. It could be used (temporarily) as a comparison model. The other possibility is if you want me to build it stock and leave off the deck, winches, servos receiver, I would consider that as well. I guess I just can’t see why you want to tear apart a boat if you can simply add your ideas first. As you can see - my question has purpose to it which you did not detail or specify in your original post - and it also allows the option of not having to tear it apart after your get it in order to install your idea.

I have looked extensively at - (on purpose to find - and not-on purpose because they are all over the place) - your posts and no where can I find the reason “WHY” you are canting the keel along with the lead bulb. I understand the concept of moving the bulb - NOT the entire keel assembly. Perhaps this is one of those big boat ideas that doesn’t seem to make sense when scaled down to the r/c size boat. After all - “they” (big boats) are moving a couple of thousand pounds while we are moving 2-3 pounds maximum. Looking for a bit more detailed clarification - and if it already exists - no fair "editing’ a previous post to include it, can you please tell me where to look - or post a copy of it here? I don’t have the time and am not about to wade through 456 of your posts to try to find the single answer. I have an idea and 5 detail sketches that I have already shared and am awaiting comments or observations. If, however, your detialed information can explain why we need to move more than just the bulb, I may not post them since you are the “expert”. The question is “bulb - or bulb and keel?”

Thanks

ADDED via edit: The reason I waited this long, was because I had no interest in the F-100 project, and based on previous experience felt the F-100 was a year - perhaps two years away from being on the water. The concept of a “TRAINER” for canting keels, based on an inexpensive boat, with the possibility of the owner doing their own modifications to a canting keel stirred my interest. I am already involved in a class you helped create, and see no further building support for production boats than I saw at the end of 1999 - so pardon me for being skeptical about yet another idea of yours. If others “buy in” I might too - but I can’t accept, a mechanical system of yours that is as yet unbuilt, untested, and unproven. I guess I feel I might be able to make a similar “breakthru” on paper or on the forum. If the system you propose had already been built and on the water, then that is another story altogether. In the meantime, I guess I can make mechanism proposals just like you - except I am in a position to post my idea sketches for further comment or refinement by others - if YOU can clarify my Question number two.

system · January 23, 2004, 6:08pm

I wanted to get a complet B32 to sail it and make some tests with it then if it seems like a good way to go add a cnting keel mechanism to it. I would liketo try adding it to an existing complete boat-if I add it at all. I don’t think it is a good boat for this project but I’d like to check it out first hand before I finally decide.
I guess I really don’t understand your question but I went thru all four pages of topics under “Technology” and read the first post under each topic connected in any way with canting keels in about ten minutes.
I don’t know what you mean move the bulb and not the keel; how could you possibly move the bulb and not the “whole keel assembly”??
For a canting keel to work it must pivot at the hull allowing the bulb to move in an arc to weather. the fact that the bulb moves to weather as the wind picks up prevents the boat from heeling. So in a wind where a “normal” boat would be heeling 30 degrees the canting keel boat could be vertical with the keel canted to weather. The keel canting is just the same as a crew moving to weather to keep a boat flat. When the keel cants to weather it loses some of its ability to develop lateral resistance so some additional form of lateral resistance must be used. Grunta uses a fixed daggerboard on his boat.
Generally, a canting keel boat can have 40-50% less ballast that the same length boat with the same sail area. In practice a canting keel boat can also carry more sail area in lite air due to the ability to move the keel bulb to weather.

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

Dick_Lemke · January 23, 2004, 6:43pm

<blockquote id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by lorsail

I don’t know what you mean move the bulb and not the keel; how could you possibly move the bulb and not the “whole keel assembly”??

For a canting keel to work it must pivot at the hull allowing the bulb to move in an arc to weather. the fact that the bulb moves to weather as the wind picks up prevents the boat from heeling. <hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”>

Thank you for the detail on the BH32. I understand you want a completely stock boat and would, loan you one - but for trial, testing and measuring - not to tear apart.
Thank you for the above quote. You have confirmed that my thoughts “might” work. Once I have feedback from a couple of people looking over my sketches, I will consider posting. The first sentence of your above quote - is the key to my idea. If my idea can be made to work, the requirements/outcomes outlined in the second sentence will be provided.

I don’t know if my idea will work, but after receiving comment, I’ll let the rest of the board tear it apart. Perhaps it won’t - but looking at the individual parts, I don’t see why not. This is part of the reason why I was suggesting that the moving bulb ballast for the “TRAINER” specifications be left open to see if there are other, alternative ideas or potential solutions.

Hope to post my idea sketches Sunday night - or Monday at the latest.

There are 5 sketches:
1= general side view and component layout;
1= detail of keel and bulb concept;
1= detail of thru-hull fitting that might be able to be built from glass;
and 2 = detail (general) of possible winch controls for tilting the ballast (1 drum and 1 arm)

ADDED via edit: Have not seen or heard of detail on the Wind Warrior concept/system - so opefully I won’t be treading on some patents or copyright issues. My idea sketchs however, have been copyrighted - just an FYI [:D][:D]

system · January 23, 2004, 6:53pm

Your idea will surely be welcome; I wish you could verbaly describe it and then post the sketches Sunday.
You know nobody on this forum would tear it apart(!)

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

Peter_Birch · January 23, 2004, 6:57pm

If you have anything to do with Nicorette(former Sydney - Hobart) it has been fitted eith a canting keel. The boat pulled out of the race last year because it hit a submerged object, possibly a sunfish and the “rudder” on the bow that works inconjuction with the keel was damaged. This"rudder" moves in the opposite direction to the keel to keep “height” in the boat(stops sideways slip. When this was damaged it caused the bow of the boat to begin to delamenate.
Peter

hoj · January 24, 2004, 11:47am

there is a BH32 on e-bay right now for $39

Dick_Lemke · January 25, 2004, 11:46am

I received a couple of comments back from some who have pre-viewed the idea - so will include them as “things to consider”.

Remember, this is an idea, and a theory - it has NOT been tested, trialed or prototyped. Thought I would post the comments and thought and let you engineers - or “wanna-be” engineers pick it apart. A little bit of actual theory converted to drawings instead of words - hopefully easier to understand.

THE CONCEPT:

Instead of moving the keel AND the bulb, thereby losing lateral resistance, and having to add yet additional underwater appendages (more drag) my idea is to move ONLY the bulb. The original keel - or same basic keel (foil) remains as provided in the kit, or modified slightly. The keel “blade” DOES NOT MOVE. It remains in vertical position; it eliminates the need to add more appendages under water to recover lost lateral resistance; it reduces the “swing weight” of the assembly, and it allows smaller thru-hull fittings.

Since we are only moving 3 lbs. (approximately) according to Doug, the need for so much mass (keel) to support the bulb when tilted is questioned. Also, moving a rod sideways in the water takes more energy, servo strength, and power than moving a round rod sideways. Kind of like trying to push a canoe paddle sideways through the water. With the paddle blade at right angles to the blade movement, the thin paddle blade easily moves to the side. Turn the blade so the flat surface of the blade is pushing against the water, and there is a heck of a lot more resistance. Same with my keel idea. Moving the keel sideways through the water creates resistance (duh ! - Like lateral resistance) whereas moving a rod sideways creates very little resistance.

The drawings show the bulb supported by a rod, but swinging through the center of a slotted keel. SUGGESTION from pre-screeners of the idea suggest a possible change and moving the rod to the leading edge of the keel. This eliminates needing to slot the keel for rod movement, and any turbulence or drag induced by the keel slot. A concern about turbulence by a round rod was also voiced. I cannot speak to that, although, if of concern, the leading edge of the rod “could” be shaped like the leading edge of a foil.

The rod (approximately 1/4 inch to 3/8 inch diameter) has a cross rod that acts as fulcrum point. It is housed within a set of fiberglass (or carbon) fabricated plates. One goes on the bottom of the hull, the other on the inside of the hull. The small cross rod is supported and rotates in this thru-hull fitting. SUGGESTION - does this require a bearing surface? - RESPONSE: maybe not. It would be water filled, not a dry rotational rod. It is relatively slow speed rotation. Also weight is very little compared to big boats. And if there was a desire to have some sort of a bearing surface, nylon, delrin or similar high molecular material could be used to reduce friction.

On top of the thru-hull, a rubber grommet could be used. Smaller than a baby-bottle nipple or condom, these are often used in thru-hull steering assemblies on fast electric or gas r/c hydros.

I have included two concepts for winch control - a HiTech 815 BB arm for fast trim - but not sure about power, or a HiTech drum winch - slower, but line could be multi-part purchase to increase power. Either winch is less than $80.00 U.S. (unlike the Guyatt drum winches now upwards of $150.00 U.S.) If the drum winch is adequate for the needed job, depending on where the pin is placed to link the arm to the canting bulb rod, the amount of tilt could be mechanically controlled. In light air, it could be a very small throw, in heavier air a larger longer throw (more degrees of tile)!

Again - a lot of ideas - but needs input and thoughts from others. Go to it. Any comments made WILL NOT be considered personal. Criticism is expected and invited. Just be prepared to back up your arguments or comments with fact or with your views. - Although there is nothing wrong with just saying “I Don’t Like Canting Keels!” ?. Cause I’m not so sure I do either - at this time.

General “concept” and side view of idea.
Download Attachment: [ smCK.jpg](http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/data/Dick Lemke/200412513384_smCK.jpg)
9.64KB

General view (3D) of swinging rod/bulb with fixed keel
Download Attachment: [ smCK1a.jpg](http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/data/Dick Lemke/2004125133836_smCK1a.jpg)
13.95KB

Drawing of possible thru-hull fitting plates and fulcrum support.
Download Attachment: [ smCK1b.jpg](http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/data/Dick Lemke/2004125133912_smCK1b.jpg)
16.35KB

Concept for arm winch attachment
Download Attachment: [ smCK1c.jpg](http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/data/Dick Lemke/2004125133943_smCK1c.jpg)
11.01KB

Concept for drum winch with line control attachment.
Download Attachment: [ smCK1d.jpg](http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/data/Dick Lemke/200412513402_smCK1d.jpg)
16.36KB

Matt_White · January 25, 2004, 12:22pm

Dick,

I think this is an interesting idea. Sort of a CBSF (canting ballast single foil) concept. I like the idea of moving the rod to the leading edge because I think you’d induce lots of turbulence with the slot in the fin coupled with that produced by the rod.

I would add that you might need some sort of “true home” engineering on the fin leading edge (or rod trailing edge), so that the rod would always end up lined up correctly when that is what the skipper desires. Another idea might be some device between the top of the bulb and the bottom of the fin. I suspect that a slight misalignment when verticle would be bad.

Gotta think about the fin leading edge when the ballast is canted, too.

Again - very interesting and fresh idea!

The Other Matt