kFOIL?

<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>so as to create as detailed and complete a resource as possible for people to use this new technology-- for free.
<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>
Doug,
Perhaps the best solution is for you to use your own web site for your infomercials and complete resource. Just post the link to this wonderful new “techno-gismo” and if anyone is interested they will know where to go. Perhaps you could have areas on your own web site for “Latest News”, “Updates”,or possibly “Photos”. That is of course if you were to invest in the proven technology called photographs.

Tom
Seawind #80

Hi Guys,
Have you ever thought about constructing the wings out of lead so as to get the weight further out & down & you would still get the lateral resistance of the wings.

Rob

Hey Rob,

The wings on my prototype are Stainless Steel. While this is not as dense as lead, it is certainly dense enough to add to the weight of the keel. Lead might be too soft to work for thin wings (they might bend under the loading).

However, this may infact cause some legal problems.

In my discussions with the US1M class secretary, Jim Linville, regarding the legalness of this design for the US1M class, he came to the conclusion that if the wing is considered ballast then it cannot move (otherwise it would be considered movable ballast). I’m not sure I 100% agree with him since the spirit of this rule is to prevent people from adding to the righting moment of the boat by moving ballast around. When the wing is deployed it has no more or less righting moment than it does when it is stowed, so therefore the moving of the ballast produces no additional stability. Be that as it may, this appears to be the sticking point in the ERS.

If however, the wing were made light enough to clearly not be considered ballast (for example if it was a foam core carbon fiber wing that would actually float), then it could not be considered ballast but rather some other device (none of the ERS hull appendage definitions like fin, keel or bilgeboard really seem to fit) whos role is primarily to affect leeway. This, of course, opens other possible legal issues…

Jim has decided to consult with the US1M technical comittee before he rules on the class rule issue. I will keep everyone posted as to what they decide.

  • Will

Will Gorgen

Here we go again. Yet another technological breakthrough from the super advanced mind of Doug Lord. Breakthrough number (i’ve lost count) that will never become reality.
Just a note on patents. As I understand it no-one else should have seen working models or drawings of item up for patent prior to it being presented to the patent office.
Or is the person I know that works in a patent office wrong.
Peter

Peter,

People can see it as long as they sign non-disclosure agreements, etc. Your freind is right that you cannot make it public until the patent has been filed with the office, but you are allowed to share the idea with others so long as you do it in a legal way that protects your idea. Doug’s lawyer is very careful about making sure that protocall is in place.

  • Will

Will Gorgen

Rob, on full size boats that may use the FOIL putting lead in the wing or wings may be possible since they are able to use a thicker section than on models.
On the initial canting keel prototypes the foils are made of carbon because they have to be so thin.

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

Greg,

You are right in many respects and I have been somewhat conflicted over this myself.

My experience with sailing the US1M consists of Racing a freind’s mistral in 3 races last season at our local club. Our club has a fleet of 8 or 9 mistrals but perhaps only 3 or 4 will show up for any given race day.

The performance of the boat was quite a bit different from my lead sled Fairwind as I expected. I was able to get the boat to perform quite well winning 2 of the 3 races, but the boat had been tuned by my freind before he handed me the controls, so I cannot really take credit for the wins.

You are right that my boat is designed with 4 servos. The mast and the rudder are designed to cant and the 4th channel is for the keel wing. The mast canting bulkhead is rather intricate with the servo mechanism mounted on the forward side and the mast canting pivot and cam on the aft side. However, I am also building a second bulkhead which would have a fixed geometry (non canting) mast base I am incorporating a gunwale structure that will allow me to mount either of these two interchangable bulkheads to hold the unstayed mast (and in fact will allow me to move this bulkhead around to change the balance of the boat).

I have designed a crossbeam for the canting rudder that I can put into the boat to lock the rudder in a vertical (non canting) position.

I plan to have a second keel fin that would have a standard bulb with no wing.

bottom line is that I plan to be able to convert my boat to a standard US1M relatively easily. I may in fact sail it in this configuration for a while to get the feel of things before adding in the other bits.

I am building my boat from a Wick Cobra Hull. I thought about the Sterne US1M design, but someone near me had a Cobra hull laying around that needed some TLC and that he was willing to give me for this effort.

Given my racing experience (3 years in RC and 25 years in full sized) I realize the pitfalls that can come from a boat where too many things can go wrong. However, I spent most of my full size sailing career sailing a very complex 2 man boat (the M-20 scow) which has as many sail control lines as a modern 470 plus bilgeboards. Having so many things to adjust requires the crew to be very experienced. but once you have mastered the boat to where pulling the strings becomes an unconscous act, the extra performance that you can get from all those controls is significant.

I consider this boat to be a grand experiment more than a competitive campaign boat. If I was going to challenge for the US1M national championship title, I would probably go with something closer to a standard boat design. Don’t get me wrong - I intend to race my boat. But I expect to have unforseen challenges and am fully pepared to have the answer come back that a canting mast boat is not faster than a standard boat. But, I am not willing to give up on this idea until I have proven it to myself.

Frankly, I don’t think I would join the US1M class if it were not for this radical design. I am a firm believer in one design racing and would choose the ODOM over the US1M for a class that I wanted to race in.

Since the US1M is intended to be a development class, the philosophy is to explore the design space and search for new go-fast ideas. This is different than the philosophy of a one design class where the emphasis is on level playing field racing. So I told myself 3 years ago that if I ever got into the US1M class, I would use my engineering mind to test some radical corners of the envelope. I do not expect to be 100% sucessful, but I am exploring an area that I believe has potential. This is not just based on wishful thinking but on a fundamental understanding of the physics of sailing. I recognize what I am trying to accomplish and also what the potential factors are that could spoil my effort. I enter this design effort with my eyes open…

I beleive that this platform will give me the ability to do some good experimenting. For example, If I leave the mast centered and leave the wings stowed, then the boat is very close to a standard US1M. So I can sail it in that configuration and compare my speed to the other boats on the pond. Hopefully one of the other boats in our club will allow me to trial horse against them. Once I establish a baseline, then I can change one factor at a time and see what the effect is.

Of course straight line speed is only one factor that makes a boat able to win race. Can the boat tack effectivly, can it be reliable enough to compete in a long series without breakdowns. These are all factors to be considered. I have no illusions that I may be creating another TNZ “hula” boat - fast on paper but unable to deliver when it counts. But that is what development is all about (at least for me). I am willing to take the risks…

  • Will

Will Gorgen

<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Doug’s lawyer is very careful about making sure that protocall is in place<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>

Get a life for Gods sake.

ITS TOY BOATS!!!

Actually Tranth, its not just toy boats.Its every full size canting keel application if the probable higher upwind performance of CBTF is not desired because of room constraints or because of something as simple as being concerned that the forward rudder might hit an object at sea. Full size applications that will be tested in addition to the canting keel are low aspect fixed keels where with the use of the kFOIL? the wetted surfce of the fixed keel might be able to be reduced.
I am trying to make a new technology available to the users of this forum without abrogating any of my rights associated with the patent I have applied for. Certain procedures must be followed when I do that.
But the point is that I’m trying to give the numerous individuals working on canting keel boats another alternative for the extra lateral resistance that they will require. I’m not being forced to do this ; I’m doing it to try to help make canting keels more appealing to a wider range of people.
The new topic, when it is ready, will deal concretely with the design and application of the kFOIL to rc sailboats either with canting keels or canting masts. The topic will be well moderated(I hope) to stay on the topic and much information will be presented and made available regarding physically how to use this system.Other forms of lateral resistance for use with canting keels are discussed under their own headings in this Section.
I urge all those interested in canting keels to take the time to digest this information since just because a boat has a canting keel is no guarantee it will be fast. Technical details of lateral resistance , wetted surface, balance changes etc MUST be looked at closely .These nuances are covered for most of the other forms of lateral resistance(CBTF, daggerboards, gybing daggerboards, centerboards etc) and will be covered ,in detail, for the kFOIL?.

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by lorsail
[…just because a boat has a canting keel is no guarantee it will be fast. <hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>
<hr noshade size=“1”>
Too bad this comment wasn’t made earlier. Seems like this is a position that many of us were taking - but when we suggested this, it turned to a personal attack! How come it’s OK now for YOU to take this position?

I distinctly remember Roy (or perhaps someone else) saying that just because a boat had a canting keel didn’t mean it would win in actual around the buoy racing. They also asked if there was some kind of proof that your statement had been even measured in real life, on-water racing. At that time, I believe YOU said to the person “… you couldn’t be more wrong.” - or something similar.

Yet now, this statement seems 100% in conflict with all your previouse claims of half-truths or innuendos. I’m sure this turn-around is easily found by comparing your previous posts.

Just an interesting change in your previous position. How Come?

I’ve always believed that carefull design was critical to the application of canting keels to rc sailboats-or any form of movable ballast.
But what made me bring that up was :1) the large and growing number of people on this forum and elsewhere that are experimenting with rc canting keels and 2) a conversation I had with Bruce Sutphen at CBTFco the other day. He told me the story of an 80 footer in the Manzanilla(sp?) Race that was just held. Seems the owners of that boat had wanted to use CBTF but balked at paying the royalty-around $70,000 on that size boat. So they did it themselves: installed a canting keel, installed a fixed daggerboard forward of the canting keel-and produced a dog. She was beaten in the race by a smaller fixed keel boat.
If one takes the time to look specifically on this board at how the solutions for lateral resistance can affect a boats performance one can find the reason why this boat is a dog.I believe part of the reason also was that she was a conversion from a fixed keel-but so was Wild Oats-a speed machine using CBTF.The main reason was lack of carefull design…
All those seriously interested in canting keels should read the detailed info provided here to help you understand the physics of what happens.
The kFOIL? is a new concept based on an idea tested on a fullsize boat: using wings to augment lateral resistance with the new twist of being able to use the kFOIL to get rid of them when they are not needed.
Test results ,etc in the new topic down the line…

Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

And that repeatedly asked question comes again. When will you personally build what you are sprouting. I don’t want to here that Matt is building one or that Joe blow is building one, I want to know When doug Lord is going to build one. Doug you go on so much about how good these thing could be if they are built right. How do you know what is right and what is wrong if you haven’t built one yourself. I mean this canting keel boat (for example) that Matt is building, you can’t say whether it is right or wrong until you build one that is the same length boat but with your canting keel ideas, and the exact same thing goes for this new idea.
Build one yourself first, you have the ldea, you say you know what is right. Build it.
Peter

You’re mostly right Peter: I’m working full time on building a 24" one off and a couple of 30" proto’s-all utilizing the kFOIL?;once these are completed and tested I’ll be full time on the F100. These boats are the number one priority. Results soon…
Important work is being done by Will Gorgen and Hal Robinson in the application of canting masts in the US One Meter Class…
The work Matt,Gappy, Grunta John Beavis and a half dozen others are doing is equally important and illustrative of the tremendous interest in using movable ballast particularly canting keels in rc sailing.
This is an area of development within rc sailing that is vibrant with a large number of people doing actual work not just talking about it.
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

<font color=“red”>Keep the discussion on the subject please, this is the Technology Discussions area, take the rest somewhere else. Thanks, Matt</font id=“red”>

<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by Dick Lemke

<font color=“red”>Keep the discussion on the subject please, this is the Technology Discussions area, take the rest somewhere else. Thanks, Matt</font id=“red”>
<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>

Dear Mr. Moderator !

  1. I am still waiting for you, the other moderators and Chad to post what is allowable and what isn’t! That request has been made several times without response, yet you continue to censor this forum as if it were your own. If we continue to have moderators making automatic changes WITHOUT NOTICE to posted replies, I fear you and your friend Mr. Lord will have the forum to yourself. It was my impression that after the last go-round, moderators were going to have the decency to at least notify the poster of what was considered unacceptable and allow the poster to make changes. I have checked all of my email addresses and find no such notification!

  2. If someone makes a post to this forum they are open to questions related to what they have posted. In my original post that you have removed, I questioned (or stated the following), among other things …

a) AN OPINION - I posted that I didn’t think too many big boat sailors come to this forum to read all of Mr. Lord’s posts. (That is an opinion and based on Mr. Lord’s own post…)<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>If one takes the time to look specifically on this board at how the solutions for lateral resistance can affect a boats performance one can find the reason why this boat is a dog.<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>

b) A QUESTION - What school did Mr. Lord earn his engineering, naval architectural degree at to allow him to position himself as the know-it-all by posting the following…<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>All those seriously interested in canting keels should read the detailed info provided here to help you understand the physics of what happens.<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>

c) A QUESTION - I suggested AND ASKED … if Mr. Lord has all this engineering and physics knowledge, and could earn money consulting for any major sailing syndicate or organization, why does he spend so much of his time here?

Painful, pointed questions? No doubt - but keep in mind, they would not have been asked had Mr. Lord chosen NOT to make such posts.

There is one OPINION and two questions! They will be repeated until there is an answer. In the mean-time might I again suggest you, the administrator and the other moderators have an email session and decide what is OK and what isn’t? TO call my post off topic when I can point directly to quotes Mr. Lord made seems to imply a conflict of interest, given the previous knowledge of your association with Mr. Lord. You are being used as he uses others - for his benefit. If he continues to make statements, I will continue to ask the questions.

<font color=“maroon”>Answers to your questions Dick;
a)So what? Tell me how that directly relates to the subject, because I can’t see how.
b/c)Irrelevent to this area of the board. Ask away but this isnt the place to do that.
</font id=“maroon”>

Moderators,
I AGREE totally, with Mr Dick Lemke’s post.
Why do you RED INK our posts for being deemed “off topic” when 90% of the total posts in the whole Forum have been highjacked,but ignored???.
IF, you are going to starts “giving out Red cards” it MUST be done to ALL.
It would also be more Civil to ask the " offender" to delete their post, before the red ink arrives.
I HAVE DELETED MY POSTS- - you only had to ASK.
Mr John Dowd, (JayDee).

Greg, there seems to be some misinformation around: just talked a long time to Hal on the phone. He has not abandoned his
canting mast boat! Far from it he continues to improve it and says it shows great promise.
Will, Hal said that somebody(TB,I think) asked Jim Linville about retractable wings on a keel bulb yesterday and was told by Jim: “have at it for one year after that it will be illegal because it is movable ballast”.
UPDATE:3/8/04- I forgot to mention that TB(?) also said that he could make the wing(s) out of carbon instead of metal and Jim apparently responded that he still considered it movable ballast…
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing

Anyone who reads the first post here will know that one of the inspirations for the kFOIL? was the 52’ Sydney Harbor Racer Atomic(renamed from Bondi Tram) .The boat has a canting keel and uses wings on the bulb similar to IACC wings to make up for the lateral resistance lost when the keel cants.
I talked to Andy Dovell today the princible designer of that boat in Sydney, Australia. He says the boat is fast and performs very well. In a recent race it beat a number of Volvo 60’s outpointing and out footing them .
He says they have filed a patent on the fixed foil concept and that he expects to apply it to other canting keel yachts.
While excellent performance on a full size boat is no guarantee of success on a model it is a very good sign…
UPDATE:3/13/04 the owner of the 30’raceboat CAYUSE(seen on page 62 of “Maximum Sailpower”) is having his boat evaluated for conversion to a kFOIL? based canting keel system!
Update: 4/9/04 The first three kfoils for use on CK Trainer/F100 proto’s(two 30" one 23") are about to be tested.Each uses a carbon foil and is mounted under the bulb. A slotted bulb would have been better but since these are one offs for testing I didn’t make new tooling. The canting trunks are installed in the CK trainer/ F100 proto’s and are 100% watertite and cant 55 degrees. The trunk only sticks below the bottom 1.5 mm(!) and eliminates the characteristic bump on some canting keel boats. Finding the right sealing medium was extremely difficult but EPDM finally worked.The trunk is critical in letting the kFOIL actuator shaft come thru to the inside of the boat.
edt:add info
edt:4/9/04-add info
edt: 3/13/04- sp correction and gr. correction; additional information
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing