Over Jammer

12-19-2024, rev. 12-20-2024

My PDQ had 6 winches; there were jammers, but also enough winches so that redirrecting lines was minimized and there were multiple options for many tasks.

 

 Everything except the traveler is on one winch when on port tack. 

 

A single A single turning block faces off with seven clutches. There is a second winch just below, but it has five clutches of its own to deal with.  You don't put sheets in clutches on a performance multihull (Dragonfly).

 

True, I can't trim the jib with the loop over the winch, but the halyard trims easily. I could run the jib sheet through a clutch, but I really don't like jib sheets in clutches, and locating the clutch would be tricky. 

 

If I were to run the halyard through the groove instead I can avoid threading the tail. Lay a loop sling over the winch, place the rope over the sling, thread the LFR onto the end of the sling, slide the rope into the groove, and drop the other end of the sling over the winch. The only downside is that the rope could fall out of the groove if there is not tension, but that is not really likely.

 

Another option would be to cut a groove in the LFR and run the loop sling in the groove, bonded in place. A bit like this, below.

Antal Open Low Friction Ring

 

 

My challenge is trivial by comparison, and is sort of solved with a low friction ring on a loop. But I am considering a turning block so that I don't have to thread it. But they are $300! I may have to machine one.

 

 

I could put a turning block here, or maybe an inch farther aft.

 

Not all Winterizing Products are the Same

3-2014

As part of an up-coming Practical Sailor article I tested the anti-corrosion properties of a number of leading winterizing agents:

The test rig...

 

Ethanol Based                                  Glycol Based

The coupons after 2 months...

The left hand column, all ethanol-based.

1. Water
2. Vodka
3. I won't tell... just avoid ethanol.
4. I won't tell... just avoid ethanol.

 The right hand products I like, all propylene glycol-based. I forget the order, but they were all perfect.

1. Starbrite
2. Camco
3. Pure Oceans
4. Sudbury Marine
5. Southwind/Dow Frost

The clear point is not to be a cheapskate. Stay with something reputable, and stay with glycol.

The best chafe sleeve, and why a cover is NOT a chafe sleeve.

After a little more time spent with the chafe machine, a champion emerges. as well as the observation that weave is as important as the material.

What? Being Spectra is not enough? A it turns out, there is an enormous difference between braided covers and tightly woven tubing. In fact, our lowly nylon tubular webbing typically out-wears Dyneema and Kevlar rope covers. No wonder we have been so happy with our experience using nylon webbing as a chafe cover for docklines.

Top to bottom:

New England Rope ARC. 10 minutes against grindstone.

New England Rope Dyneema Chafe Sleeve. 10 minutes against grindstone.

For reference:

New England Rope Regatta Braid. 1 minute against grindstone.

New England Ropes StaSet (not pictured). About the same as Regatta Braid.

9/6-inch 7x19 rigging wire parted in 13 minutes.

But I hadn't tested nylon webbing in the same run, or plain Amsteel...

Top. ARC, as before.

Center. Plain Amsteel, Dyneema Sleeve, 9/16" nylon tubular webbing, all for 10 minutes.

Lower. Regatta braid, 1 minute, as before.

Notice that the nylon webbing outwore the high-tech cover by a mile (it's still running, at just over 30 minutes, and not through)! Notice that plain Amsteel is 30% through the first yarns, worse than the webbing.

Which is not to take anything away from this Dyneema webbing sleeve that wears like iron. Wow.

Before we question why New England Ropes even make the cover material, realize they serve a different purpose. ARC makes a nice cover, holding in jammers, minimizing core slip, and not stiffening the line. The Spectra sleeve and tubular nylon does none of these things. All it does is wear hard.

----

But this was all tested dry. What about the effect of water? We retested the same materials, and ...

I've never really thought too much about nylon chafe when wet, since it didn't apply to my experience; my mooring lines are well-protected, my anchor rode is chain, and my bridle rigged from cleats with good chafe protection (I suspect this is generally less of a problem for cats--we must always use bridles, but they are easier to rig chafe-free).

Wet vs. Dry Chafe
(2 reps each, only a few minutes variation)

Material                                    Wet vs Dry      Time to Chafe Through
Nylon webbing                          Dry                   45 min.
Nylon webbing                          Wet                   14 min.
NER Dyneema chafe sleeve      Dry                    50 min.
NER Dyneema Chafe Sleeve     Wet                   40 min.

I expected a difference, but 3x caught me by surprise. It is more than a simple change in strength, probably beyond simple analysis. I need to see how much difference Maxijacket makes; there are applications like chain-to-rope splices where Dyneema's not an option. I'll also expand this to include ropes and polyester.

The nylon webbing still makes sense many places, where availability in large sizes and price matter. For comparison, the cover on a typical line fails in 1-3 minutes.

Bare Feet or Shoes?

 I'm firmly in the shoes camp. I've stubbed to many toes and even on my beach cat, years ago, I prefered wet suit boots if the wind was up at all. Better grip. But iron sailor in past went barefoot in the rigging around the Horn (leather soles were more dangerous than cold toes--I bet they would have scooped up rubber-soled trainers in a heartbeat) and the debate continues in some circles.

I wonder if this has ever been systematically tested.

• I'd bet dinner that the correct sole will out grip skin on every surface. I doubt it even merits serious discussion.
• I've heard of studio dancing, but always with the caveat that the feet can't be sweaty. Boats get rain and seawater on them, so forget that.
• Surfing feels better with bare feet, but the reason is nerve endings. You can feel the board better. I've surfed with wet suit boots, and the traction was the same or better, but the feel was less. But I was also not cringing with fear every step, wondering if I was going to cream something. If you slide on a board you just fall, so toe protection, pain, and fear don't enter in. Also, the deck of a surfboard is optimized (soft wax) for bare feet. I doubt anyone spreads surf wax on the their side decks. Without a good coating of surf wax, a board is slicker than eel shit.
• I've heard you can "feel" more with bare feet. I sailed a beach cat for a decade, winter and summer, and I can honestly say I never felt bare feet were better. If there was serious wind, boots for 100% certain. Better traction. The only reason for bare feet was casual days of beach bumming or incinerator heat and light winds.
• I've known of a rock rock climbing problems that are done bare foot, but only because a toe needs to fit in a very specific hole. Weird stuff, climbers consider it very, very fringe. 99.999% of the time shoes are better.
• Deck shoes should be thin-soled for feel and so that they conform over and around ropes. Not the best for tennis or miles of walking, but that is what true performance deck shoes are. "Boat shoes," as distinct from deck shoes, never appealed to me. I'm not into style. Multi-court shoes and trainers can certainly work on decks, but the soles are thicker than optimum to allow padding for running and jumping. I don't run or jump on a boat, at least not the the point where additional padding is required. I do wear orthodics for flat feet. I have multiple pairs, some for higher impact sports, including hiking, and some thin for sailing, cycling, and skating/skiing.
• There is always the matter of skin cancer and covering up. Some are deniers. I admit to wearing multi-strap sandals on some of the hottest days ... with thick sunscreen.
  

December is just a few days away, so I'm not going to be testing any of that anytime soon.

Stove Top Heater

 Every fall someone re-posts the idea of heating the cabin with a flower pot on the stove. I was smart enough to test this at home, where the pot shattered, throwing hot bits around the kitchen. It is an unsafe idea that might wok sort of and might get you burned or your boat damaged. Just no.

 As long as the link stays live, here is the article I wrote for Good Old Boat about an improved stove top heater. This was written about 5 years ago, and I would not change a thing. It works. Stove Top Cabin Heater

 

The concept was simplicity itself:

• We already have an engineered heat source with fuel supply, regulation, and a safe base.
• The Dickenson Cozy Cabin Heater was/is nothing more than a burner, heat transfer space, and a properly sized flue.
• A stainless stew pot serves for the heat transfer space, though perhaps not quite on the stoves highest setting.
  
• A 1-inch flue is a good match for a typical burner, though perhaps not on the highest setting. 
• All of the exhaust will go up the flue. If the flue is the correct length, it will be no more than 100C where it penetrates the deck. No problem. Test and insulate as needed. The highest setting might allow some exhaust to go under the pot and out into the cabin. You can feel this with your fingers near the edge. Adjust.
  
• You can still cook, though more slowly, on the top of the inverted pot. The aluminum skirt conserves heat, for the pot, helps heat the room (more surface) and keeps the cooking pot safe. 
• A very low fan (I use one made to run off the USB port of a PC) helps distribute the heat. it will cook my F-24 in 20 minutes after which I turn it down. This is at about 35-40F.
  

I would turn it off before leaving or sleeping. But if the cabin furniture is warm, the cabin will stay warm for a while. Getting the furniture warm is important.

• The interior volume is about 300 ft^3, or about twenty pounds of air. The cabin furnishings weigh several hundred pounds. It is the furnishings that absorb the heat and keep the cabin warm. Kind of obvious, even though common sense tells us that the air is what we must heat.
   

Deck Level Wind Indicators

Rev. 11-27-2024

Eagles have landed on my boat and eaten three Windexes. They play with them, like a cat.For now, I'm done giving them toys.

 

 

 

So I've started testing deck-level flies. I've been using pulpit flies for years on all of my boats (beach cat, Stiletto, PDQ, and F-24) and like them. The location has to be careful chosen and I used something different on each boat.

Now I'm looking at shroud ribbons and flies. I didn't like them on other boats, but they seem to suit my F-24. 

 

 

Two DIY versions, top, then Nautos and Davis Wind-Tel.

We after a few sails we trimmed the long ribbon to about 10 inches, more like the others. The excess length just made it flutter more and harder to read.

In fact, I'm liking all of them at first blush. I imagine I will stay with the one that holds-up best.

---

The top DIY is on with Velcro. It does not spin, so it can wrap, but it always unwinds when the wind drops in a jibe. The second uses a DIY polyethylene spool (10 minute lathe project for the pair) for easier rotation, making it slightly more sensitive than the Nautos ribbon, but maybe not enough to matter. 

 

The Davis Wind-Tel ($65 per pair) is out of production, but there is lots of old stock around.  The Nautos Tell Tails are cheap ($10 for two sets) and though potentially fragile, work pretty darn well. Being able to spin vs. tied on really does help.

 

Any ideas? I'll test anything.

On the concequences of being "Protected"

From the King and I, the "It is a Puzzelment" monolog:

 

Shall I join with other nations in alliance?
If allies are weak, am I not best alone?
If allies are strong with power to protect me
Might they not protect me out of all I own?

 

You don't get protected without losing freedom as part of the deal. This is the same with individual freedom. Historically, it just doesn't work that way. Freedom is better. We can protect ourselves, as a group.

 

The Goofy X-Spread Rig on The F-24 MKI

10-26-2024, rev. 11-6-202, rev. 11-27-202, rev. 12-7-2024

The failure of an F-24 mast at the lower diamond wire junction this week (not my boat) started me thinking about the odd rig on this boat. It was not used on any other F-boat, and in fact, no other boat that I can find. Supposedly Gino Morreli designed the rig, but he's a smart guy and he never used this design on any other boat. I'm think it's far more likely this was a John Walton (son of Walmart founder Sam Walton) design choice, one of many that Ian did not approve of. Oops.

 

 The failure point was just above the lower (forward) diamond wires. Note also that it was sideways (as typical), not in the direction of the forward wires, suggesting to me that they are not helpful.

Mono-hulls are typically rigged with spreaders and shrouds anchored to the deck. This provides side support with no added compression load. The proportional stretch of the uppers and lowers insures that the mast remains accurately in column, even as it is slightly deflected to the side under wind loads. Masts, when they buckle are failing in compression. Occasionally a jumper diamond is provided on the front to control the bend of a very slender mast, though larger mast sections and those stabilized with pre-bend typically do not require this extra support.

 

One the left (F-24) rig there are two sets of diamond wires on each side. The drawing omits the outer set on the left and the inner set on the right for clarity. Those are not loaded when the mast is pressed to the side and forward reaching.

 Re. Center of effort.  According to calculations based on ABS (American Bureau of Shipping) documents, the force on a sail is primarily concentrated on the head, clew, and tack. A quick look at the reinforcements and the arraignment of fibers in load path sails makes this obvious. Consider how the luff is relaxed when the sail is backwinded. In fact, about 65% of the sail force above the boom is concentrated at the head, with the balance spread along the luff tape. The load is NOT uniformly distributed along the mast, as commonsense might first suggest.

 

The weird F-24 X-spreaders. The forward spreaders hold the shorter wires. The aft spreaders are about the typical rake angle and provide the pre-bend. 

 F-24 manual image.

 

Multihull masts are often rigged with big rotating masts for several reasons. A big main is advantageous, as it provides accurate heel control through twist and easing the mainsheet. They can tolerate a heavier mast (rotating masts must be heavier because the staying is less efficient) because they heel less and as a result, the mast is not outboard, contributing to heel. They have a wide shroud base, reducing the need for spreaders to create angle. Often multihulls cannot sustain high mast base compression loads because there either is no center hull, or in the case of trimarans, because it is lightly built, without the need for structure to support a keel.  For the same reasons, rotating masts are nearly non-existent on monohulls. Because there can be no fixed spreaders to carry side loads, rotating masts use diamond wires, and it works out well that they rotate with the mast, supporting the weak side of a thin, aerodynamic wind section. Forward support isn't needed, because the mast is wide in that direction. The diamond spreaders are angles aft to help create some pre-bend, which helps with mast stability (resists inversion and pumping) and with draft control (you can de-power by de-rotating the mast which pulls cloth out of the sail, reducing draft).

 The combination of diamond wires, aft-swept spreaders, and aft-angled cap shrouds also helps eliminate the need for a fixed backstay, something that is problematic with a high roach mainsail, the other half of the quick-heel-control formula. It's hard to maintain enough forestay tension without a backstay, and savy multihull sailors quickly learn to compensate with a tight mainsheet.

But the F-24 MKI mast does not rotate, so why the diamond wires, instead of fixed shrouds? It's easier to step the mast when trailering, since no tensioning is required. The center hull is relatively narrow and very light, with no good place to anchor the shrouds. There is also the need for aft-raked cap shrouds to replace the backstay. Of course, many cruising cats have either conventional shrouds or diamond wire stays with aft raked cap shrouds and no second set of diamonds.

There are several problems with the willy-nilly addition of stays without working through the design. When a mast fails, it fails in compression. Like buckling a drinking straw, the tensioned side does not tear, it is always the compressed inner side that buckles inwards. Every additional wire and its associated pretension adds compression, so unless it provides needed support, it actually weakens the mast. The more wires, the more compression. Calculations of buckling strength for this mast sections give a compression working load of 6,500 pounds. Rough calculations based on wind pressure and heeling force (the boat was reefed and very close reaching) and bending moment at the failure point  show that the mast failed under a compression load of about 12,000 pounds (if distributed--this reflects the probable stress on the side that failed). This is well over the safe working load of the section, but less than the expected failure strength.

If we total up the compression loads from the shrouds, diamond wires and other rigging ...

• Forestay. 2200 pounds
• Shrouds (only one is under much tension sailing under full load). 1200 pounds
  
• Mainsheet. 300 pounds
  
• Halyard, jib. 300 pounds. Note, jib halyard tension does not change forestay tension + halyard tensions at the mast, only between the mast and the anchor point at the furler. The total is fixed by shroud and mainsheet tension contributions.
  
• Halyard, main. 500 pounds
• Cunningham. Does not count, since it just offsets friction in the mast groove, from head to foot.
  
• Forward diamonds. 1000 pounds total (but not included at failure point)
  
• Aft diamonds. 2400 pounds total

... and adjusting for angles (only part of the tension is directed in-column) we get about 6,500 pounds total. That does not allow a lot for bending moment. Curiously, 36% of this is from the diamond wires and 10% from the forward diamonds, which we don't need; there is very little forward load on the mast, and the center of the force is near the head of the sail (forces perpendicular to the luff tape are very low, except near the head and tack--not the wrinkles, the luffing when backwinded, and the lack of significant reinforcement on the slug grommets).

The rigging guide gives 500 pounds max for the forward diamonds and 1000 pounds max for the aft diamonds. But what if they really don't need pretension for stretch, since the mast is not bending? Then the pretension for the aft shrouds needs to be just enough to establish the prebend (0.8% of length), and forward diamonds just enough to keep them from going slack, since we probably do not need them at all. But I'm disinclined to remove them entirely, and going slack might allow them to jump out of their fittings. 

10-29-2024. I checked the tensions on my F-24 MKI.

Wire                  Observed (pounds)              Maxium Spec (pounds)            Re-set to (pounds)

Shrouds             800                                      1500                                           (adjusted each sail)

Forestay            (same as shrouds by geometry, except as increased by mainsheet tension)

Aft Diamond     1400                                    1000                                           800

Fore Diamond    800                                      500                                             350  (below failure)

Total Diamonds  4400                                    3000                                           2300

 This represents a (4400-2300)/6500=32% reduction in mast compression, which translates dirrectly into a 32% increase in strength. 

 Worse, exactly where the reefed main applies it's greatest force (65% of the drive above the boom), just above the forward diamond wire anchors, the lee diamond wire is pulling down and to leeward. And that is where the mast buckled to leeward with a reefed main. The smoking gun. Removing or slacking the forward diamonds also reduces this stress. 

What if the mast raising stays were snugged and perhaps reinforced in the deck (Lower shroud)? This is a conventional rigging solutions? This stabilizes the lower mast with less compression in the critical area. It would also help to move the anchor point slightly aft and outboard, while staying inside the jib track.

Takeaways? The forward diamond wires increase compression and pull in the wrong direction without providing any useful improvement in mast stability. Best would be a re-designed mast with only one set of aft-swept spreaders. The less drastic solution is to reduce the tension on the forward diamonds; I judged 300 pounds to be sufficient preload and sailing observations confirmed they do not go fully slack.The aft diamond wires should be just tight enough to create 2.5 inches of pre-bend (as specified by Ian Farier)  and no more. These serve a purpose, but extra tension does not help. 800 pounds appears to be sufficient, and I may reduce this, based on further sailing observations in strong conditions. 

Will I reinforce the deck and improve the lower shroud? Undecided. No. The wires are too small to bother.

Time will tell, but I'm comfortable with my calculations. The mast should now be 30-35% stronger, no small improvement.

---

rev. 12-7-2024

 

A few more ideas. I could support the center by running a second set of shrouds to the same anchor point. In this way, they would move together.  In addition, they would be tensioned along with the cap shrouds. My gut is that fixing the diamond wires makes this unnecessary. I have to address the diamonds anyway.

 

3D Genoa Leads

 I've written about this for Good Old Boat and Practical Sailor, but I still get a lot of questions.

My F-24 came with pin-slide cars and an out-hauler. As long as the sail was fully deployed, this worked adequately, though occasionally a little more leach tension was desirable. When the jib was roller reefed, however, the car needed to be run all the way forward, which wasn't a lot of fun when the conditions were rough enough to require it. Lots of spray and flogging. 

Converting to 3D leads was simple.

• The car is set most of the way back, to the full sail, windward sailing setting.
• A bulls eye bushing was fitted to an odd car I found in the free cycle bin. It was originally used to mount a ladder on the rail, but by cutting away the end and fitting a bushing, it became a low profile block. However, any car that you can attach a pulley or low friction ring to would work. The forward track hold down bolt could be replaced with an eye bolt. Many possibilities.  The main thing is to have at least 2:1 purchase so that it can be adjusted under some load, though not necessarily full load.
• A climbing rap ring is used as a sheet guide. They are nice because there is plenty of room inside for all the lines. But a low friction ring or sailing ring could work.
• Cam cleats for both tails.
• I spliced the tails into a continuous line. This reduces tangles and makes it easy to sort out. When one is in the other is out, so it reduces the tail clutter in the cockpit. But they could be separate.
• The line is bare Dyneema single braid for low friction. The tails are covered with polyester to make them large enough to handle and so they will hold well in cam cleats. I used Samson XLS and disposed of the core, after using it to pull the Dyneema through.

The new system allows lead adjustments in just a few seconds to any position. Small wonder all of the sport boats do it this way now, right on up to about 50 feet.

Jib hauled out when reaching deep

 

 

Normal windward setting.

 

 

Hauled forward for a reefed jib.

 

 Hauled out just a tick for very close reaching

 

 

Close-up of bullseye fairlead.

 

 

Not a great picture, but you can see the two cam cleats and the red/white line/loop that controls forward and outhauling

 

 

 

This is a Non-political Blog ...

 ... But it is also my blog.

I started as a Republican. I voted for 

• Gerald Ford. A good moderate guy with a terrible set of cards.
• Ronald Reagan. He had some tough times near the end.
• George Bush Sr.
  
• Bob Dole. I wasn't impressed, but I was less impressed with Bill.
• George Bush Jr.once. He turned out to be too full of himself and not entirely honest.
  

 And that was the last time I voted Republican.

• Barack Obama. I really wanted to vote for John McCain. I believe he is a very good man and would have been good for the country. But I also though Obama could set a valuable precedent. I remember, on election night, feeling that I would be happy with either.  They were both presidential. Mitt Romney would have been OK too.
  

And then we made a turn.

• Hillary Clinton. She could be irritating, but Trump made his money stealing from people in the casino business. I was brought up to believe gambling was a sin, and that casino owners were in the same catagory as pimps. I still feel that way. A moral person just can't enjoy stealing from people. And why was anyone surprised that he turned out to be a narcissist showman a pathological liar? It was ... obvious. Why were we surprised that the world did not respect him?
  

And now it has escalated miles past the point of ridiculous and scary. It seems there is no action or statement or threat that shocks. There is no red line, not in law, not respect for the process or even Constitution. January 6th he proved that he was a dangerous megalomaniac. 

But more damning for the Republican party is that the only thing they can do is circle the wagons and double down on ... a mistake. They have lost the ability to lead or frankly, to think for themselves. They can only rush to see who can spout the most bile. There are better Republicans. Are they hiding? I believe, hopefully, that many are mortified with the state of affairs, mortified that Trump can be presented as the best statesman they have to offer, but at the same time certain that if they put one toe out of line they will be dissected. As a former loyal Republican, I feel sorry for those that have been attacked and marginalized. There are good people in there. But they seem to be fading.

I would have voted for Nixon. He did a lot of good things. He also did one bad thing and, his own party had the character to confront him with it. He had the character and honor to resign. He appointed a good moderate man to succeed him. I respected that. I thought it would be good for that party in the long run. I think it was.

 Now, the Republican party, the party I supported for decades, has lost it's compass and its sole. I don't think they have any idea where they are heading. They seem to have lost track of right and wrong and even the rule of law. I really hope they can start over. I fear they cannot.

I hope Kamala, should she win, will aim for the center. Not too progressive. It might help the Republican party move to the center as well. As I see it, views change slowly, and the US has moved to the left faster than people can adjust. We've made a large group  uncomfortable. Again, I'm not saying whether that is right or wrong, only that it is true. I'm saying a people just can't change that fast. Real change takes generations, and slow but steady is probably better than two steps forward, then three steps back. The result has been an obscene and sometimes violent overreaction back to conservative values, which too often manifest as mean values. Fear plays a big part, and power-hungry people have always known that feeding fear is a cheap short cut to power. We need to be brave about change.

----

America is great, and becoming greater all the time. I've lived here a good while, and you can't convince me it was better 20, 40, or 60 years ago. It wasn't. Isolationism and protectionism have always lead to inflation and slowed economic growth. Engaugment and competition lead to growth and greatness. 

The world is different and at the same time better, but not all people can acclimate to change. We probably do need to slow the rate of change, not because it is right or wrong, but because it is necessary to allow people time to catch up. 

I could, of course, be wrong about everything. Opinions are like that.