Help with Sail Plan. (Lug Ketch)

[Beowolf]

Hey everyone:

So I've pulled the hull out from the back corner of the barn, dusted it off, and I'm finally ready to advance. The hull is a wide, shallow double ended (fat canoe) as shown below.

http://i329.photobucket.com/albums/l384/jhackborn/BoatPlan.jpg

It's 16 ft long with a 6 ft beam. At the waterline, it would typically displace more than 1000 lbs, but in reality, it will typically be a bit under that with boat, crew, and gear. The centerboard is ballasted enough to make it sink, but that's it. Stability will come from crew placement. As for the intended waters, it will be used primarily in protected inland lakes, with perhaps the occasional jaunt out into Tawas Bay, once the captain feels confident with it.

Tawas Bay (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=44.271263,-83.472061&spn=0.07584,0.181961&z=13)

I'm looking for a simple to rig/unrig/sail with plan. I'd also like to keep the C.E. as low as possible to help keep it upright as much as possible

I've been playing around with a few pieces and I'd like to know what you all think.

I started with the standing lug proportions published in the Sailmaker's Apprentice, but found that with the foot that long, a ketch rig became unworkable, or so it would seem, so I am not posting that picture. The two that you see below are derived from some sailplans that I've seen on existing designs. Although the sizes have been changed, I tried to preserve their proportions.

The first one is from a John Welsford design. At 146 sq ft, it has the most sail area, but the boat seems (at least to me) to be a relatively heavy boat that will have a rather large surface area in the water, so that sail area may be a real boost in light wind.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Z7X9UlIdDso/SUSOrPs-FvI/AAAAAAAABPw/2Qf2NOXkWxE/s512/Boat%20Picture%20003.jpg

The proportions to the second plan came from a Paul Gartside design. Although I like the higher peaked yards, (which I didn't get drawn quite right with the masts,) and the high angle on the booms would keep them clear of people's heads, it does sport less sail area, (which for all I know, good be a good thing as well.) It totals to 115 sq ft, not including the full roach leech (which I didn't include in the sketch.)

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_Z7X9UlIdDso/SUSOqzfhimI/AAAAAAAABPo/bKAsyMP78oE/s512/Boat%20Picture%20002.jpg

Both plans place the C.E. in front of the C.L.R. by about 11% the waterline length. And both plans also place it at about the same height (9 ft above the waterline.)

I would really like to get peoples thoughts on these. I'm starkly new. (Yes, I should have built to an established design when I started this years ago, but I was young and foolish when I started, (not so young anymore,) and the point of no return was crossed a long time ago.) And I'm looking to get this boat out on the water and finally start enjoying it.

Thanks in advance for your comments, and questions, and (more importantly) answers.

Jeff

[Peerie Maa]

A picture of the hull would be useful, so we can see her proportions.

These are trad boats of a similar size and B/L ratio: http://www.orkneycommunities.co.uk/YOLEASSOCIATION/index.asp?pageid=454, but usually sprit rigged.
Nigel irons uses standing lug, with a high peak and short foot on Romilly: http://www.burnettyachtdesign.co.uk/romillyspv.html going for efficiency not low down grunt. His sail proportions might give you some ideas.

[Thorne]

More info please -- hull is solid wood, marine ply or ?? Design and/or specs? Using an outboard or oars as auxiliary power?

Sure seems like anything under 120 sq ft is a bit under-powered for a boat that size. If you build your sails with reefpoints, you can reduce sail when needed, can always drop one (or both) of the sails if it really picks up.

Here's a similar boat with a similarly-sized rig, so I'd say you are on the right track. It is built from marine ply and is unballasted except for the centerboard weight.

The builder of this boat says that he's been able to sail it under the aft sail alone.
http://www.luckhardt.com/eb-sideview1w.jpg
http://www.luckhardt.com/edboat4sale.html

[JimD]

Aesthetically, I like the first drawing better. The lower peaks seem to suit the hull profile.

[Beowolf]

Here's a few pictures that I took once I dragged it back out.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_Z7X9UlIdDso/SUV3kzFnLeI/AAAAAAAABQw/llSLB7V9518/s720/IMG_1242.JPG

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_Z7X9UlIdDso/SUV3nzKDcEI/AAAAAAAABRI/lJDJmCzhHDw/s512/IMG_1245.JPG

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Z7X9UlIdDso/SUV3okXbUqI/AAAAAAAABRQ/zhffVspR06w/s720/IMG_1246.JPG

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Z7X9UlIdDso/SUV4BRcXT8I/AAAAAAAABRc/drCQzDYk6LM/s720/IMG_1247.JPG

Construction wise: It's .5in strip planked and plywood bottom with fabric and epoxy sheathing inside and out. There are bulkheads at every other station. (One forms the front face of the back seat of the cockpit (There's a built-in ice chest there.), one is located halfway through the cockpit. (I'd like the mizzen mast to located near this point so that it could be partnered by a thwart that would attach from the centerboard trunk to that bulkhead. The mast would be offset to one side of the trunk, but I figured I place the boom on the side of the mast that would place it back on the centerline.) The next two bulkheads define the front and back of the little cuddy.)

The original design was called "Tor" by Charles Strayer. It was 13 ft x 5 ft and available at the time on the databoat site. I redrew it to 16 by 6 and added in the cockpit seats and cuddy cabin. Originally drawn, it had a marconi sloop rig, I would really like to go with shorter, unstayed spars as well as a lower and relatively easy to handle rig.

[Woxbox]

I think you're on the right track. I like the look of the second plan more. Both for appearance and also becuase it should be easier to get good sail trim with the higher peaked yards.

One thing to keep in mind with these standing or balanced lugs -- when you drop the sail as soon as the tension goes out of the luff the yard starts to swing and flog all over the place. In a small open boat, you can usually get a hand on it and tame it before things go wrong. But in your boat, I'm not sure how easily you'll be able to get forward far enough to pull sail and yard inboard without climbing on top of the cabin trunk. It could get dicey.

One other thought. Getting the balance right is critical to good performance. If it were me, I'd come up with a way to hold the mizzen in place temporarily for the first few outings to find out where it gives the best balance before making a permanent step and partner.

[Ben Fuller]

Phil Bolger had a lazy lift rigged to the peak of a large lugsail yard. Belayed so that when the real halyard was let go the yard would go vertical> Kept it out of your head.

[James McMullen]

What you've got there is a small canoe yawl hull. Please don't sell her short by screwing her up with a ketch rig. Change that puppy to a lug yawl and you will vastly improve your comfort and performance!

Put the masts out in the ends of the boat and you've got more room for you and your passengers. If you figure out the proportions right, you won't even have to duck and dodge the boom when you tack. Make the front sail the primary sail so that the increased effectiveness of the unobstructed leading edge of the sail not in the turbulence and eddies from sticks and sails in front of itself able to do its thing better per square inch of sail area than any sail operating in the disadvantage of a trailing position. The mizzen, being just a balancing and steering sail, can be quite small and handy, and you can put it behind the helmsman so nobody has to duck or get a crick in the neck having to reach around the mizzen mast which is smack dab in the way of where you want to sit. Look at Oughtred's Ness Yawl or Caledonia Yawl or Nigel Iren's Romilly or Roxanne or John Welsford's Walkabout for ideas about the rig with similar boats. If you build her as a ketch you will forever (and rightfully so) be cursing that mizzen placement. A Yawl rig is where it's at for a 16' long two-sticker boat.

[Todd Bradshaw]

That sounds like a really good suggestion to me.

[Beowolf]

I'm certainly open to that. Give me a day or two and I'll see if I can work up a couple of sketches and get them posted.

Thanks for all the suggestions and links so far.

[Beowolf]

All right, so I was finally able to complete a couple of sketches. The first one borrows proportions from a Caledonia Yawl. For personal aesthetic reasons, I tried a second balanced lug for the mizzen. I don't know how effective any particular sail is vs. another as a mizzen.

http://i329.photobucket.com/albums/l384/jhackborn/yawlplan005.jpg?t=1229782310

The second drawing is an adaptation of the sail plan on Romilly. I adjusted the rake of the masts a bit more to vertical. I also kept the standing lug mizzen instead of swapping it out for a balance lug. And although I don't like the idea of the front end of the boom jutting into the aft end of the cockpit, I do like the appearance of a "matched set" of sails.

http://i329.photobucket.com/albums/l384/jhackborn/yawlplan006.jpg?t=1229782664

I'm curious about rig size though. I drew both designs with a main in the 120-130 sq.ft. range, figuring that this is the primary sail for driving the boat while the mizzen provides adjustment for helm balance. (Am I wrong here?)

Also, I was surprised to see the C.E. move aft a bit. I know the mizzen is farther back now, but I figured the relatively larger mainsails would have a greater effect on it.

And though I can see the advantages of a yawl vs. ketch in terms of performance, in both cases, the C.E. moves 6" to 1' higher up. But without any experience/frame of reference to measure against, I don't know if I'm making much ado about nothing in that case.

I'm sure I have more questions, but I have to get the kids dress before SWMBO gets home, so in the mean time, I eager await all you comments, questions, and responses.

Merry Christmas.

[Woxbox]

Jeff,

Where are you going to sail this boat? Depending on conditions, you may not need that much sail area. What typically happens with the mizzen is that it helps drive the boat in light air, but as the wind picks up and weather helm increases, it's not needed much anymore and dousing it helps restore balance. On the other hand, of course, if you reef the main you may find you need it. A couple of sketches to figure out those numbers would help.

The "Romily" style plan does take better advantage of keeping the main boom out of the helmsman's face, a big advantage of the yawl. You don't have to sail a boat with clear room to stand between the main and mizzen for long to really appreciate the clearance. That plan also gives you a bit more lead, but whether it's still enough I can't say.

[Clinton B Chase]

Beowolf, Are you including the whole area of the mizzen in your calculations. It is usual practice to use 50-60% of the area. I do a lot of tweaking of sail plans which invariably means I add a mizzen to a boat. Feel free to check out the collaboration at this site to get some ideas: http://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=78940


I use 60% of the area when determining CE. It makes sense that your CE total moved aft in the second sketch since you don't have as much SA in front of the mast as you would in the balance lug sketch. I think the mizzen in the second sketch is best. The main lug, however, is a preference thing. While the high aspect Romilly lug is gorgeous, it doesn't seem to fit your boat as well as the one that was based more on a CY lug. Off the wind the CY-type lug may behave better, which one the wind you may be able to get a tighter luff and a better edge with the higher aspect rig. James, if he comes back, found the higher aspect lug of his new boat a little tricker to fly when on a run. Essentially there would be less twist in the sail -- Todd can confirm -- in the CY type lug. I sailed a great boat with a Irens style high aspect standing lug, and off the wind it takes great attention to keep the yard from not getting in front of the mast while flying downwind. I was taught in design to put the CE on the leading edge of the centerboard if it is a high aspect rig/board. If your CB was raked aft a little bit you'd probably find the CE would fall along it and usually that is all you need. If the lead is within 5-10% that would be normal. Definitely, definitely, definitely build the boat so that your mast placement -- whether that be rake or fore-aft stepping, etc. -- can be tweaked after launch to get the sail balance right. You can also change the CE placement slightly by moving the yard fore or aft on the halyard. I prefer to get it right with rake.

You are right about that the lug will be your driving sail and the mizzen you will end up adjusting depending on helm feel and how picky you want to be.

Have you tried just a leg-0-muttin style mizzen and the lug from the first sketch, which will end up looking a lot like the CY rig but that's OK. It fits the boat type. You might try making the lug in the first sketch above a little more high aspect but less than the second one and see what it looks like with a mizzen much like the one Oughtred puts on the CY and what it looks like with the second mizzen you drew, which also looks very good.

You have a neat boat. I'd be interested in what you learn from this all and how the lead % compares to the CE placement along the board compared to actual sailing.

Cheers,
Clint

[Peerie Maa]

If you bring the tack of the mainsail to the mast as a standing lug, you can do away with the main boom, which removes one more source of minor injuries.
I too like the Romilly alternative best.

[James McMullen]

I say better plenty of sail area and reef when necessary rather than not enough and be forced to use the stinkin' outboard. i like both of those new sail plans much more than the first ones. The second "Romilly" configuration is probably closest to what I am using on my own favorite boat:
http://inlinethumb49.webshots.com/34672/2475785700088484686S500x500Q85.jpg (http://sports.webshots.com/photo/2475785700088484686LWCItB)

I must disagree with Woxbox in one respect, however. Though it is indeed standard practice to strike the mizzen on a full yawl to reduce weather helm when the wind picks up, you do not want to do this on a cat-yawl, ever! Striking your mizzen entirely eliminates your ability to get the boat to heave to instantly. See Rebecca Ann Goes Over on the CY forum for more discussion and commentary on this issue. http://www.mavc2002.com/cyforum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=519

[James McMullen]

Also, don't get rid of the main boom as Peerie Maa suggests. Roxanne and Romilly now both use big, hefty battens as booms as it definitely improves your sheeting geometry, especially off the wind. Leaving the boom off is a fisherman's trick to clear the decks for net hauling, not a performance enhancing feature.


Sorry, boys. . . .but this is my favorite small boat rig, and I have nearly nine years of experience with various permutations of it now.

[Clinton B Chase]

Actually, to second James, off the wind a boomless sail twists to a great deal without that batten. I sailed Ben Fuller's Ran Tan (a Dias Harrier) and found that the right stiffness of batten makes the type of sail a joy to use and really controls twist off when off the wind. Ed Burnett, who collaborated with Nigel Irens on the design of Romilly, has drawn up plans for a wood-strip Romilly and has added an actual boom to the lug, now.

On striking the mizzen, even in a blow having that mizzen in place and therefore the ability to lie head-to-wind while you reef or strike the rig altogether is a huge safety feature in a boat.

Cheers,
Clint

[Beowolf]

Thanks for the input fellas.

It's intended sailing waters are a handful of inland lakes (2-3 miles across their longest dimensions at the most) that are very sheltered. I'd also like to get into some protected areas of Lake Huron (Tawas Bay and maybe Saginaw Bay if the weather was calm, but that will depend far more on my own comfort with the boat.) The lake that it will be on the most is a man made lake with a very soft and shallow bottom (16 ft at it's deepest.)

Speaking of that lake, and the issue of lead. I haven't messed with the C.E. adjustments yet, but I can easily position the main mast another 6 inches forward and by figuring only 60% of the mizzen area into it, the lead could probably grow somewhere in the 12-15% LWL range. Add to this the fact that there would be times when it would be much easier to leave the centerboard canted back a ways, and the lead grows even more. So is there a rule of thumb in regards to how much lead you can have before things become unruly/unsafe?

In regards to boom vs. boomless...I'm in favor of keeping the boom, if nothing else than for the sheeting options. I'm thinking that with the boom on the mainsail, I'll be able to bring the mainsheet off a point just forward of the cockpit to keep the cockpit a bit more uncluttered. This would probably fall about 2/3 to 3/4 of the way back on the boom.

Thanks again

Jeff

[Osborne Russell]

IIRC the ancient wisdom is that the mizzen is the first sail up and the last sail down.

[Beowolf]

*Bump*

Help me out here, guys. I'm not even sure what questions I should be asking, so I'm really leaning on all of you to ask them.

It's really important to me that this boat sees the water this summer.

Thanks

[Clinton B Chase]

If this were my project I would aim for 5-10% lead, the standard rule of thumb, but you might also look at other canoe yawls and see what lead they use. Consider contacting some designers and asking. Or build in adjustability into you construction and aim for 5-10%. If you go over the risk of lee-helm starts to develop, but how much so depends on the hull characteristics. I'd also cant the board back when figuring lead so that it is not completely vertical. Then the board can adjust helm feel as well. So stick to the lead rule of thumb AND look for the CE to fall along the leading edge of the board, in a high aspect rig, which your is to some extent.

Clint

[James McMullen]

Just remember, too much weather helm may be annoying, but any lee helm at all is dangerous as well as absolutely crippling your windward ability. Having the mizzen available definitely eases your balancing problems. If you're going with a yawl rig you just made your life much easier. Your latest drawings based on the Caledonia Yawl sailplan look pretty good to me.

[ahp]

James, you pictures and your boat are beautiful. I guess it is a Calidonia Yawl, yes?
I would love to take a look at it or better yet sail it, but unfortunately I live in the other corner of the US.

[Clinton B Chase]

Go with the CY-like set up. The CE and lead look good. Try to come up with a way to be able to adjust the mainmast position to fine tune things before permanently installing. Oughtred's partner and step arrangements would be a good model, a great model actually. You could play with mast rake and/or fore-aft placement. I wouldn't glue anything in until sea trials in variety of conditions and loads have been done. Don't worry about making holes in the boat when things need to be adjusted, those can all be properly filled. Again, like James, I vote for the lower-aspect CY-ish lug rig. Looks really good. Keep us posted! We can all learn from this.

[James McMullen]

ahp, thank you for your kind words. My boat is not a Caledonia Yawl, though it is quite similar. After much experimentation and experience I have come to the conclusion that there is no finer rig for a larger sail & oar boat than the unstayed lugger yawl. No other rig combines the convenience, handiness, performance and seaworthiness of the modern unstayed lug rig. Any other rig of equal performance either requires much longer spars or stayed masts and/or is unhandy to reef or to stow while afloat. Modern dacron sailcloth and airfoil sail shapes are used to great advantage by this seemingly simple rig.

[ahp]

James, what is the design of your boat then?

[Woxbox]

James, I think you're right about the handiness of that rig. But another thought before you decide exactly how the mast is going to be stepped -- figure out the weight of the main mast, and ask yourself whether or not you can lift this thing up and drop it through a hole in the deck without risking life and limb. It's not just the weight -- when you pick up a long stick by the bottom end, even a lighter one can be a handful. And you don't have a large foredeck to stand on here, either.

I think you're boat is in the borderline area -- some would say it's not too big to manhandle the mast into place, others would say it is too big. Certainly, on a windy day it would be a real handful. The option is to built a tabernacle, which could shorten the mast itself and make raising and lowering it a much more controlled exercise. It could be hinged for total control, or a bracket that guides the butt end as you lift the mast and slide it into place. Bolger has drawn a variety of these things, there are lots of ways to do it.

[Clinton B Chase]

To follow up on WoxBox, a lightweight B'mouth mast and a hinged mast partner/gate would solve the valid issues you raise. However, the main mast is not that big. It is only a 128 SF sail.

[Beowolf]

That's actually one piece that I've given a lot of thought to.

1: The cabintop will hold my weight, which gives me a fairly large area to stand and the hole in the deck would be 4" below my feet. This would allow me to hold the mast further up towards the middle while handling it so that the leverage acting against me wouldn't be quite as great.

2: If that doesn't work, I've been working on a pivoting bracket, that sounds like what your describing. (Damn. There goes all those patent royalties ;)) Basically, the mast would slide into a bracket positioned above the hole in the deck. The mast would be horizontal and extending out forward from the boat, into the bed of my truck. Then I would simply have to walk it back and up, til it slides down the hole. Then the bracket would unclamp and be removed.

3: I've been practicing my birdsmouth sparmaking. My first go is a ten foot spar. It has 1/2" walls (max thickness) and is 3" in diameter for the first 6 feet, then tapers to 2.25" in the last 4 feet. I had fun building this and would like to make at least the two masts in this fashion. Speaking of which, could someone send me in the right direction to look for scantlings on the masts? I have "Understanding Rigs and Rigging" but I can't seem to find what I'm looking for in there.

Lastly, I know that the actual CY rig uses a leg-o-mutton style mizzen. I've also seen this arrangement on a couple of other boats. Is there a clear reason/advantage to this sail over a lug?

Thanks again

Jeff

[James McMullen]

ahp, my boat Rowan is a one-off design based on a combination of Oughtred's Ness Yawl and J-II/Arctic Tern designs to personalize it to my own requirements. It is the same length as a Caledonia Yawl but a much narrower beam and lighter displacement--more sail and oar oriented than the CY which is really too beamy to be any fun to row any distance.

Beowolf, I think the reason to make the mizzen a leg-o-mutton shape rather than a second lug is just to simplify things a bit. Since even a leg-o-mutton mizzen's mast is still shorter and lighter than the mast for the fores'l, then you don't lose anything in stowage space or windage by making that sail a bit simpler and losing the extra spar in the mizzen yard. My mizzen usually stays hoisted to the masthead and I furl the little girl by just winding her up around the mast to make a neat, tidy bundle. If you think that a lug mizzen is pretty enough to put up with the hassle of that extra yard and needing to fiddle with another halliard then go for it! I think that two matched sails are fetching too.

[Woxbox]

Jeff -- The tabernacle doesn't have to be removable. Check this out, borrowed from Jim Michalak's website:
http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f92/Woxbox/tabr1.gif
Bolger has drawn a similar setup for some of his boats. The two upper frames allow the mast to pivot back and prevent the mast from dropping as it is lowered. The pivot pin isn't a necessity -- eliminating it allows the mast to be raised above deck level and then lowered down into a step (in which case the lashing shown isn't required.) Without the pin, the mast can also slide forward once lowered, so it isn't hanging off the back of the boat so far. But you still have good control of the stick when raising and lowering it. Consider that you may have to do this out on the water with wind and waves creating for a pretty lively situation.

[ahp]

Thank you James.

And, thank you Woxbox for the tabernackle idea. I might need it. I am thinking about the Caladonia Yawl. (One of these days I have to stop thinking and build something.) If I do I am considering a partially decked version which means stepping the mast through a hole in the foredeck. I should estimate the weight and length of the foremast to see if such a thing is needed.