The Shape In A Junk Sail

<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   Next >  Last >> 
  • 22 May 2025 16:15
    Reply # 13502204 on 13500036

    Slieve, I agree that yard angle, and the head of the sail in general, must be very important. Although I cut my square sails as a perfect rectangle, when rigged, the yard was always angled forward slightly, it just worked better that way. From the research I have done to date, triangles are indeed claimed to be the most inefficient and some evidence points to an upside down "U" shape is the most efficient. The F4U Corsair and P40 Warhawk airplanes were designed with that idea in mind, their wing tips were U shaped. I have not experimented with such a sail design yet.

    Tell tales, in my opinion, can be a double edged sword. While they indeed show airflow over a sail, they do not exemplify how efficient a sail is. One may have a baggy, stretched out sail with all the tell tails flying, but the effective power created by the sail is much less than what it should be. Tell tails can help ensure a sail is working to its own maximum effectiveness, but beyond that they cannot represent exactly how well a sail is working overall.

    I do not claim to be a deep sea navigator, or anything of the like, but from what I understand, in very foul weather the goal is not necessarily to have good performance to windward but rather to maintain the boat in an upright position. Assuming a vessel is in the middle of an ocean with virtually unlimited space, the lack of drive of a flat cut sail and the inability to tack does not matter. Stability, safety and comfort are the goals, and a flat cut sail seem to be a good choice to meet those needs. Obviously being close to any land mass creates an entirely different scenario where performance is very important to keep the boat off the rocks. In the middle of the ocean with nothing to hit, not much drive to windward in big seas and high winds may be a desirable trait as long as the boat stays upright and the crew is comfortable.


    Arne, the sail in the photo you posted looks exactly like what I was describing, although I cannot see the lower panels. The top two panels look like they are cut flat with cambered panels underneath them. I am sure that sail works very well.


    Graham, what you are describing is almost the opposite of what I have found to work best. I attached a picture of what I believe is optimal. Another important point is what material the battens are made of. Aluminum tube has become the most common material used and it is comparably very rigid to what I used. With all this discussion about camber depth, it seems it is imperative to include the materials and techniques used to create the sail. Rigging and sheeting setups, sail cloth, and the hull used are important as well. What may work well on one boat may not work as well on another. Seemingly minor variations can have vastly different outcomes.

    The depictions I included in the attachment does not include the location of the apex of camber depth along the length of the batten but I find a good place to start is 1/3 aft from the luff. I am interested in varying that location in different panels as well to find what works best.


    - Colin Clayton

    1 file
    Last modified: 22 May 2025 16:21 | Anonymous member
  • 22 May 2025 15:21
    Reply # 13502169 on 13500036
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Graham, it’s a long time since I dropped applying rocket science when I am to make a suitable camber in in the top panels.
    My rule of thumb is to start with finding the needed round in the 4 lower parallel panels (same camber in all of them). Then I divide the round I found there with 4-6 (depending on boat type  -  flatter top section on lighter craft) to find the round in panel 1. Panel 2 is given twice the round as panel 1. Panel 3 may be given as 3 times that of panel 1 (More details on p.7 in Chapter 4 of TCPJR).


    Example:

    Say we found to need 25cm round in the lower panels.
    Then the round in Panel 1 could be 25:5 = 5cm
    Panel 2 would be given 10cm round, and
    Panel 3 could be given 15cm on both sides, or 10cm along the upper edge and 20 along the lower edge. This ‘asymmetric’ round in Panel 3 is to make it easier to match the sides with the edges of the adjacent panels.

    In the two top panels, I let the max round sit at the middle. On panel 3 I may jazz a little and have the max round at the middle at the upper edge. At the lower edge, I place the max round 35-40% aft of the luff.

    I don’t bother too much what the actual camber/chord is up in the top panels. I am even unsure on how to calculate it. I can only say that the upper and lower section appear to match each other during practical sailing on real water.



    As said. This has been described in TCPJR, Chapter 4. I warn against overthinking this subject, as it does not appear to be critical.

    Cheers,
    Arne


  • 22 May 2025 13:13
    Reply # 13502096 on 13500036

    I'd be interested in people's ideas of how much camber is desirable, both in the lower panels and the upper ones.  Would it be, to take one of Arne's sails as a yardstick, about 8-10% camber in the lower panels, tapering to 6% in the intermediate panel, and maybe 4% in the upper two panels?  Would anyone suggest more camber in the upper, or storm panels?

  • 22 May 2025 10:16
    Reply # 13502062 on 13501695
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
    Slieve wrote:

    Storm canvas, flat or cambered.

    ...

    To me, and them, this was a clear demonstration of the lack of drive and windward ability of flat sails, and that the storm canvas available on many small boats will not keep them off a lee shore. Equally, to me, it indicated that the top ‘storm panels’ on a junk rig should have camber built in. It was actually quite enjoyable to sail in that wind with an experienced crew and a well found boat.

    Cheers, Slieve.


    I agree with Slieve. The top section of the JR certainly should have some camber in it, although less than in the lower panels.
    This both makes it easy to keep an attached airflow along the leeside of the sail (= better drive) and also, the leech, now taking all the load, stays taut (photo below). There is never any fluttering in my top panels.

    Arne


    (full size photo in Section 7 in my photo albums)

  • 21 May 2025 18:38
    Reply # 13501775 on 13500036

    Storm canvas.

    i recall from windsurfing days that some camber is beneficial in strong winds.

    a smaller cambered sail performed better than a larger flatter sail

  • 21 May 2025 16:30
    Reply # 13501695 on 13500036

    Storm canvas, flat or cambered.

    Long story short.

    Some years ago I was asked by the Tall Ship organisation I sailed with to use a 32 foot Westerly Fulmar to check out 4 very experienced skippers for the new RYA Cruising Instruction qualification. All I had to do was tick the boxes when they had demonstrated how they would teach some basic manoeuvres. The day was dry, but the wind was Westerly at 35+ Kts, Force 8.

    We were able to perform most of the exercises in the shelter of the River Hamble, but I could not sign the forms without seeing them recover a man over board under sail. As the wind was across Southampton Water I reckoned the fetch was so short that the sea state would be acceptable so we motored down river and found the conditions reasonable.

    Leaving them to make the decisions I warned that there would be a MOB in 10 minutes time. With ample sea room they hoisted the storm jib and trysail on the mast, both very flat sails, and I threw the fender and bucket over, nominating one of them as skipper. He headed off on a beam reach and tried to tack, and might even have had to wear round and with the best will in the world could not get back up to the MOB. So it was a case of engine on and a re-think. They switched to a small working jib and triple reefed mainsail, both with noticeable camber. In the next 20 minutes they had all demonstrated good technique and quite good windward sailing. A quick sail back up the river and four certificates signed.

    To me, and them, this was a clear demonstration of the lack of drive and windward ability of flat sails, and that the storm canvas available on many small boats will not keep them off a lee shore. Equally, to me, it indicated that the top ‘storm panels’ on a junk rig should have camber built in. It was actually quite enjoyable to sail in that wind with an experienced crew and a well found boat.

    Cheers, Slieve.


  • 21 May 2025 14:48
    Reply # 13501626 on 13500036

    Hi Colin,

    Thank you for directing me to your video. It does show that the battens are very bendy and generally are not bending in the best direction. I do believe that you're getting poor air flow over some of these panels and are losing out on performance. This means that the performance you are achieving is not necessarily a guide to good sail shape. Even so your experiments are raising some interesting points.

    When I was building the Poppy split junk rig I was hoping to achieve a windward performance quite close to that of an equivalent Bermudan cruising boat, so when I first sailed the boat I was amazed to find that the performance was better than some Bermudan cruising boats and on average very similar. If you stand in the bow of a Bermudan rigged boat and look up the luff of the headsail you will see a nice smooth cambered leading edge. With my cambered panels I could achieve the required camper in the middle of each panel but at each battens the camber would be flat, therefore I did not expect to get as good performance as was possible with the Bermudan headsail. So the question arose as to why the achieved performance was comparable to the Bermudan Reg when close hauled.

    The other main difference between my SJR and the Bermudan rig was the shape of the head of the sail. This had to be where the extra performance was coming from. Reading Toni Marchaj’s books I could see the inefficiency of the pointy top sail and it seemed clear to me that the shape of the head of the sail was important. My earlier experience of wing-tip shape in model aeroplanes seemed to indicate that the shape of the head of the sail had a large effect on the tip vortex and the overall induced drag of the rig.

    The flow off the air across a sail is not parallel on both sides. On the high pressure windward side the air will have an upward direction towards the head from above the midpoint and a downward direction towards the foot at the bottom. On the low pressure leeward side the directions will be in towards the middle and this twisting produces vortices from the end of the boom and the peak of the yard. Concentrating these vortices can seriously reduce the overall induced drag and have a significant effect on the lift drag ratio, which is key to windward performance. Fan topped sails do not seem to encourage the tip vortex upward in the same way.

    The big question is what would be the best angle for the yard for best overall performance. No doubt the ideal yard angle will vary with wind strength therefore the best result will be a compromise. In my case I have chosen 30 degrees as it looks right and mathematically it's easy to calculate as sine 30 = ½, but I have not experimented to find the best result.

    I have received quite a few letters from people who have built rigs with splits in them, mostly complementary. When I have chased up the ones who have not been satisfied with the performance I have generally found them all to have disregarded the shape of the head of the sail. This encourages me to believe that it is not just the split and the jib that are the strength of the rig but that the overall shape is also very important. The low angled yard also has structure advantages making a low stress rig.

    For me I guess the answer is that the jibs of the split rig may approach the lift of the Bermudan jibs but the lower drag of the shape gives a better overall lift drag ratio. It certainly results is a very easy to live with rig. But then, I’m biased.

    Cheers, Slieve.


  • 20 May 2025 01:58
    Reply # 13501033 on 13500036

    Eric, the battens I used were very bendy. In fact I used them because they were marketed as being able to bend almost to a circle without breaking. The various sheeting methods stemmed from the fact that the battens were so bendy.

    I wanted to keep everything as straight and square as possible and that required a lot of tension otherwise the bendy battens would bend. I sheeted the sail from the boom with all of my sails because this applied a downward pull that flattened out the leech. At first I used the same fiberglass rod for every batten and the yard but not the boom. On square top sails the yard was very difficult to keep straight and horizontal. It had to be supported by a series of lines attached along the yard with adjustable knots leading to a ring or soft shackle. I used midshipman's knots.

    This created a structure of support that I tuned to be as straight as possible when hoisted. One problem was that if the halyard is too close to the flimsy rod it could not support the entire yard. I had the most issue with the luff and leech drooping. This required the point that all the supporting lines lead to be placed at some distance above the yard. Otherwise, the shallow angles created were not strong enough and that meant the yard could not be hoisted to the top of the mast because room was needed for the supporting lines. The distance from the yard that the halyard needed to be depended on how the material flexed.

    It was difficult to adjust the tensions of the supporting lines leading to the yard from the halyard as when sheeted, the tensions change due to stresses from load. Halyard tension became extremely important. Too tight would cause the yard and entire sail to deform. Too loose meant a reduction in efficiency to windward. Once the yards supporting lines were tuned to stay straight when the main sheet was brought in tightly, it worked well on all points of sail. I did not reef the sail due to my lack of ability to re tension whichever batten was acting as the boom. Tying the battens together at the leech and luff worked for me but I did not experiment much with reefing, and I did not build my sails with reefing in mind. I may experiment with that in the future  

    I eventually decided to use 1/2” wood dowels as yards on my square top sails. The weight difference was minimal, and it was easier to keep straight. The supporting lines remained important since the wood dowel would snap with too much bend. On the fan top style sails I used the fiberglass rods for the yard and bending or deforming was never as much of an issue.


    Paul, the reason I said a fan top could be a better choice in high winds is the angled top panels seem like they would make a good stay or storm sail while reefed down to top panels alone. I have never experimented with sailing under the top panels alone in any design. I have only tied the first panel or two down to see if it would work and I did not sail like that for long. I do not have much to say about reefed junk sails.

    The outline of the sail itself is not as important to me as the shape inside it.

    That said, it did seem like a square sail was more powerful when compared to a fan top, but both sail outlines performed much better when the top and bottom panels were flat with shape induced by cambered panels in between. I even disassembled a fan top sail to add a square top. I removed the top angled panels and replaced them with a single rectangular panel with an extra batten. It seemed to sail better, even though the sail was shorter and had less sail area overall. The performance difference was very noticeable in light winds.

    Here is that sail. Square Sail In Light Wind It was a fan top sail.

    My theory is it may have something to do with the twist in the sail among other things. The angled panels seemed to have less effect as far as twisting the sail while a rectangular one seemed to act like a lever. 

    Slieve, here is a video of one of my square top sails. You can see tell tails occasionally. https://youtu.be/7u5r-Du4mkg?si=omKiGNzyyfk8Ngc6

    -Colin Clayton

    Last modified: 20 May 2025 05:04 | Anonymous member
  • 18 May 2025 21:40
    Reply # 13500595 on 13500036
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    I also have the feeling that Colin is usingsome flexible battens on his Laser. Could you confirm, please.

    On the views there are various sheeting, could you explain your choices ?

    Eric


  • 18 May 2025 21:37
    Reply # 13500593 on 13500564
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
    Anonymous wrote:

    Hi guys,

    Cheers, Slieve.

    ** I have had a particular experience that makes me believe that storm canvas should not be flat, and I will try to remember to explain at a later date.

    Bonsoir#@#_WA_-_CURSOR_-_POINT_#@# 

    During the Jester Challenge, as I took the northern route, I encountered quite a lot of heavy weather. I had a supperb storm jib : cambered at the leach and rather flat after. It was very powerful and efficient with a great tolerance to angle of atack small variations and small healing effect. (The boat was a Pointy racing boat dedicated to single handed racing - Figaro 1)

    Eric

<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   Next >  Last >> 
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software