Maximum Righting Moment Analysis

These are close approximations of the maximum righting moment for various configurations of multione. Most of these configurations will be extremely sensitive in pitch when developing this power.My apologies for webtv which will probably not hold the outline form that I will do this in:------------------------------- 1)-Bradfield type foiler with retractable foils: weight approx. 3.3lb; foils develop righting moment therefore maximum is unlimted except by structure.Zero pitch sensitivity.
negatives: waves higher than 6" with periods less than 4’.
2)-Scram type(sliding cross); outside hulls with enough buoyancy to fly main hull; cross extended to leeward.Allup weight 3lbs.Max rm with no ballast:9.15ft.lbs. Pitch sensitivity moderate with movable cross.----------------
3)-Scram type same as 1 except with two pounds ballast on main hull. Allup weight: 5 pounds.Pitch sensitivity : moderate since cross can be moved fore and aft ; max RM:16.65 ft.lb.'s-------------------------
4)-Scram type-cross extended to weather; 2 pounds ballast at max distance to weather of main hull. All up weight 5lb.'s Max RM: 9.66 ;pitch sensitivity LOW
5)-Cat 36" beam,no ballast,3lb.all up weight.Max RM:4.5 ft.lb.s;pitch sensitivity : HIGH--------------------
6)-Cat 36" beam Power Ballast System extended furthest to weather. 2 lb.'s ballast ;5lb. all up weight.Max RM: 12 ft. lb.‘s.;pitch sensitivity:MODERATE if PBS moves fore and aft.------
7)Tri 4’ beam, no ballast, all up weight 3lb.'s; max RM: 6ft. lb.'s ;pitch sensitivity HIGH----------
8) Tri as in 7 but with movable ballast system;2lb.'s ballast; allup weight 5lb.'s; Max RM: 13.5 ft.lb.s; Pitch sensitivity moderate if PBS moves fore and aft.-----------------------------

Top three most powerfull configurations: 1)Foiler,2)SCRAM with hull to leeward+ ballast and 3)Tri with Power Ballast System.-------------------
Most stable in pitch: 1)Foiler, 2)Scram with hull to windward
3) Tie: cat or tri with PBS
Note: that a boat with the SCRAM system can be configured THREE different ways requiring only the addition or removal of weight.
The cat or tri can be configured two different ways requiring the addition or removal of the POWER Ballast System +ballast.

UPDATE: Definition of Pitch Sensitivity: any small multihull that does not use hydrofoils, a t-foil, anti -dive plane or F& A movable ballast system has the highest “pitch sensitivity” because it has the lowest resistence to pitchpole
due to the fact that only the buoyancy forward of the cross arm has any effect on stopping pitching. The amount of buoyancy translated into lift forward compared to the pitching force of the sail is too low.This is a natural design occurence on boats with hull beam to length ratio’s of 10/1 and higher and especially on multihulls scaled down from larger full size boats or multiONES scaled down from F48’s.
Boats with lower pitch sensitivity can carry more sail area than an equal weight boat with high pitch sensitivity.
Tris can be designed with the CB of the outside hull forward of the CG of the boat so that as the main hull flies the boat uses it’s own weight to resist pitchpole. This design feature is not included in the above analysis for the sake of keeping it relatively simple and because if this is not done very carefully a severe pitch up can result when tacking the boat while flying the main hull.
Anti-diving planes set at the right angle of incidence(5 degrees above the level of the waters surface when you push the hull down to the point it would pitchpole if sailing) can help prevent pitchpole especially if coupled with a rudder t-foil.
Power Ballast Systems both of the SCRAM type and the “normal” type can reduce pitch sensitivity if they are controlled properly by the skipper or increase it if not.
Foiler pitch sensitiviy is ZERO because pitchpole is automatically prevented in most conditions and requires no skipper input; a properly designed Bradfield type foiler will have no tendency to pitchpole.

Doug Lord
microsail.com
monofoiler.com
High Technology Sailing/Racing

Doug,

I got to thinking a bit more about the scram system. If you put the hull to leeward, then you need a pretty substantial hull since it will be carrying the buoyancy of the boat.

What would happen if instead of sliding the two outer hulls relative to the center hull, you set it up as a catamaran with the rig and all the electronics in a pod that slid from side to side on the “rack” of the cross beams. In the scram concept, you basically “tuck” one of the hulls away because you are not using it. So why have it? The outrigger hulls will need to be pretty floaty to take the bouyancy. Why not make them both pretty floaty and get rid of the center hull?

Just a thought…

  • Will

Will Gorgen

Will, I don’t see any particular reason why your idea wouldn’t work but I think the tri type scram system would probably be faster in light air. This whole excercise has once again renewed my confidence in a retractable foiler as the best and simplest way to go real fast in almost every condition…

Doug Lord
microsail.com
monofoiler.com
High Technology Sailing/Racing

Doug,

I don’t see that there is much of a difference…

If the tri type scram system would have an advnatage in light air it would be because the system could be centered and the outer hulls unloaded (in fact, I presume that you would want one of the outriggers out of the water completely, so you would probably bias the system slightly to one side). So you would have two hulls in the water - the center one carrying most fo the bouyancy and one outrigger just barely loaded (to minimize wetted surface area.

But you could do the same thing with the Cat. simply move the pod to one side or the other and one hull becomes loaded while the other is very lightly loaded.

I think the Cat would have the advantage as the pod could be moved around at will without effecting the tracking of the hulls through the water. With a SCRAM tri, when you are sliding the hulls around, they will be moving somewhat sideways in the water - even more so in light wind. This could be really draggy. with the cat, the two hulls would track together and since the pod does not touch the water, you would not have to worry about either hullsliding sideways in the water as you shift the weight around.

in fact, the cat would have an advantage after the tack - especially in light wind. By moving the pod to windward you create relative wind for the sails that will give the boat a squirt coming out of the tack (similar to roll tacking…).

  • Will

Will Gorgen

Thats good thinking on the cat Will though generally cats have more wetted surface than tri’s for the same displacement in light air but it just (again) brings home to me superiority of a retractable foil system…

Doug Lord
microsail.com
monofoiler.com
High Technology Sailing/Racing

One other point seems to be clear to me: no multiONE or F48 will be able to take advantage of the full class allowed sail area without some help holding the boat down–either foils or movable ballast are going to be key when the wind blows unless all the boats have the same handicap(no ballast or foils). Light weight can win races in light air if its not too puffy but the boat with a “crew” on a trapeze or foils in over 5mph will be tough to beat .

Doug Lord
microsail.com
monofoiler.com
High Technology Sailing/Racing