The Shape In A Junk Sail

  • 18 May 2025 19:35
    Reply # 13500564 on 13500036

    Hi guys,

    Please excuse the unnatural writing style but this is my first experiment with ‘speech to text’ and it seems to be disrupting my line of thought.

    It's nice to see this thread with a bit of cutting and trying in it.

    There are a number of interesting points that I believe need closer examination and I believe they come under a number of headings.

    First the problem with camber and the various panels.

    Secondly a question of twist in the sail.

    Thirdly the shape of the head of the sail being square or whatever.

    And the laser dinghy called Lores.


    Colin’s Collins observation that the position of the cambered panels affects the performance of the sale is particularly interesting. I believe we need more information before making a judgement or decision on these facts.

    I noticed that Colin only sheets the lowest batten or boom and that he uses a kicking strap to control the twist in the sail. I also notice or fail to notice any sign of tell tails on the various panels on the sale so that is difficult to determine whether the various panels are stalled or not. Until it is clear that all the panels are in an un-stalled mode it is difficult to assess the efficiency of the setup.

    In some of his writings Jan’s fellow countryman Tony Marchaj gave an indication of how the wind speed decreased at lower levels due to the effect of wind-shear , and I remember some years ago calculating that for the Westerly Longbow Poppy where the bottom of the sail was some 10 feet above the water and the head of the sail some 30 feet higher that the twist in the relative wind when sailing close hauled was approximately five degrees over the height of the sail. For a Laser dinghy where the bottom of the rig is some four feet from the water and not such a tall mast the relative wind change over the height if the rig would possibly be something similar to the five degrees (this is only be a rough estimate). However, this can have a big effect on the entry angle of the relative wind to the sharp edge off the sail, and to the performance of the flat cut panels in particular.

    There is also the question of what is a flat panel and what is a cambered panel. If we think that 8% camber is fairly normal but remember that that is the camber in the mid height of a panel and that the camber is zero along the battens then the average camber over the height of the rig must be something less like say 5% overall. Most people believe that you need flat sales in stronger winds are therefore flatten the top panels as they are considered to be the storm canvas.**  Colin found that with flat panels at the top and cambered panels at the bottom of the rig when sheeted for best efficiency the performance was not as good as with the cambered panels at the top of the rig and the flat panels at the bottom.

    I believe this can be explained by considering the entry of the wind to the leading edge of each panel by the twist of the relative wind. In the untwisted sail the twisted wind when producing drive in the lower cambered panels will be striking the upper flat panels are too steep an angle and there will be knife edge separation and these panels will be stalled, therefore these panels will produce negligible lift but significant drag and degrade the lift/drag performance and windward ability of the total rig.

    With the cambered panels at the top of the rig and the sheeting set for best performance the lower flat panels will be receiving the twisted wind at a lesser angle and will be less inclined to be stalled and probably producing some lift and lesser drag and therefore a better total lift/drag ratio of the rig and overall better performance than with the panels arranged in the earlier order. To verify this it would be necessary to attach tail tails to each panel and see what is going on.

    I believe best performance would be achieved by having camber in all the panels and with tell tales to assist trimming to make sure that all the panels have attached flow and are not stalled.

    I’ll post this and continue later. (I’m not sure I like the ‘speech to text’ as there’s still a lot of editing to do)

    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.

  • 18 May 2025 16:59
    Reply # 13500534 on 13500036

    Arne, thanks for directing me to your write-up. I had of course already read all of your well-written, immensely helpful texts more than twice, but doing it again wouldn't hurt - so I did! 

    Two points of your hypothesis I took from your "cocky" writeup (hehe, I can imagine the stir :-D ): 

    • The high-angle yard being an extension of the luff.
    • Most of the action happens at the lee side.

    Both could be valid points! I can imagine the flow separating on the lee side at the gap of the batten, and reattach quickly afterwards, not causing a lot of drag. That would be an explanation. Or even more, lift generation counts a lot more than drag reduction - I just remember the CFD discussions from this winter. The air drag of the sail is probably negligible compared to the water drag of the hull - and thus not important. Lift, however, is essential.  

    Cheers

    Paul


    PS: That would also stamp my questions about batten angle as negligible.

  • 18 May 2025 16:50
    Reply # 13500532 on 13500485

    Firstly, I am just a sailor, not any sort of technical person, and also consider myself to be just a student of junk rig.  I've read a lot about the rig, and interviewed around 30 junk-rig sailors about their experiences, but I've only sailed with two fan-shaped sails myself.  So, I'll admit that I just like the look of the fan-shaped sail.  Plus, and I could be completely wrong, I feel that deeply-reefed, fan-shaped, top panels offer more leading edge for windward work than a deeply-reefed square-topped sail.  The Polynesians used crab-claw sails, and that profile is eerily similar to the fanned top panels of a junk sail.  But I could be wide of the mark.  I am enjoying this discussion.

    PS:  I would consider your sail to have fan-shaped top panels.  Do you agree?

    Graham, thanks for your explanation! I also enjoy this discussion, and am more than happy that you fed my curiosity!

    Definitely my Ilvy has fan-shaped top panels. It works well, and I'm happy with it. However, that doesn't stop me from trying to understand the physical principles behind it and questioning whether it could be optimised.

  • 18 May 2025 15:50
    Reply # 13500523 on 13500036
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Paul S,
    I cannot say why I find the 3-panel top section of Ingeborg to be so powerful. I can only tell from experience that these three panels have proven to drive my last four boat very well. When I sail only 3-up, I know I have no help from the four lower panels.

    In Newsletter #44 there is a technical report from the first JRA-rally in Stavanger, in August 2004. Here Slieve reports from sailing my Johanna, even with only four panels set in the light winds.

    In 2018 I wrote an account from a sailtrip in Ingeborg. Much of this trip we sailed only 2- or 3-up.

    That write-up (rather cocky) caused quite a stir...

    Have a look. http://goo.gl/nD5vHW

    Arne


    Last modified: 18 May 2025 20:56 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 18 May 2025 12:26
    Reply # 13500485 on 13500396
    Paul wrote:

    Graham, Colin,

    would you mind to explain why you expect a fan-shaped top to sail better in strong winds?

    Cheers,

    Paul

    Firstly, I am just a sailor, not any sort of technical person, and also consider myself to be just a student of junk rig.  I've read a lot about the rig, and interviewed around 30 junk-rig sailors about their experiences, but I've only sailed with two fan-shaped sails myself.  So, I'll admit that I just like the look of the fan-shaped sail.  Plus, and I could be completely wrong, I feel that deeply-reefed, fan-shaped, top panels offer more leading edge for windward work than a deeply-reefed square-topped sail.  The Polynesians used crab-claw sails, and that profile is eerily similar to the fanned top panels of a junk sail.  But I could be wide of the mark.  I am enjoying this discussion.

    PS:  I would consider your sail to have fan-shaped top panels.  Do you agree?

    Last modified: 18 May 2025 12:27 | Anonymous member
  • 17 May 2025 22:28
    Reply # 13500414 on 13500036
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Two cliches are apposite here. People often say these things as an alternative to actually thinking, but these two cliches really apply:

    1. "Horses for courses" ( what is most practical, or pragmatic in the situation? necessary compromises?)

    2. "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" (The scientific approach. Has anyone tried it?)


    Also the title of the thread: "Shape" is a nice way to describe both the camber (cross sectional shape) and the plan form (the outline shape) which are being considered together here.


    It's an interesting discussion to follow.

    Last modified: 17 May 2025 22:30 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 17 May 2025 20:38
    Reply # 13500396 on 13500036

    Graham, Colin,

    would you mind to explain why you expect a fan-shaped top to sail better in strong winds?

    Cheers,

    Paul

    Last modified: 17 May 2025 20:38 | Anonymous member
  • 17 May 2025 19:48
    Reply # 13500386 on 13500375
    Anonymous wrote:

    Jan, that folding sailboat looks like a lot of fun. It is certainly easier to cut out a square junk sail, but I would argue that rigging one may be more difficult. I am curious as to why you used two yards. May I ask what the purpose of the second topmost one is? 

    This is the yard. The lower one - it was supposed to be the batten of the upper (intended trapezoidal) panel. But it's better this way, because the yard is stronger and I could experiment more easily with the halyard attachment point. Then it stayed like that and it doesn't bother me.

    Edit: In addition, any possible conversion to an upper trapezoid (or fan?) will be easier.

    As I mentioned - I'm a fair weather sailor, although once I had to sail (downwind) using only two panels. Beating upwind (to winward ?) using two panels is possible, but ineffective. (Probably also because the leeboards are too short).

    Last modified: 17 May 2025 21:17 | Anonymous member
  • 17 May 2025 18:32
    Reply # 13500375 on 13500036

    Graham, I have sailed with a square top sail in 30+ knots of wind but the sail was not reefed. It handled well upwind, but downwind I was very aware of the danger of death rolls. I had that Laser going close to world record speeds. I never built any reefing system, although I did tie some of the lower battens together to see if it would still sail and it did fine, but it certainly was not in strong wind. I figured with a sail so small if I wanted to reef I could lean forward and tie some battens together. A system of lines to do that while sitting so close seemed unnecessary.  I have sailed the Laser in open ocean but not in stormy weather, although the sea state was not exactly small. I cannot say I have sailed in a seaway, or what exactly you would define as such, but the Catalina Channel is known for some very strong currents, and I was able to sail up the coast to the Point Fermin Lighthouse from Angels Gate with ease. I agree that a fan topped sail seems like it would handle being deeply reefed better and likely maintain more favorable characteristics. I think an important variable is how much shape is in the upper panels whilst that deeply reefed. Just as you mentioned a square top sail with a lot of camber in the upper panels would likely work well in light airs, but not in strong winds when reefed, so too may a fan top sail with lots of camber in the upper panels have undesirable characteristics in strong winds while reefed. It seems we are in agreeance that too much shape in the upper panels is a bad idea. Currently I believe it is best to have the top and lower panels entirely flat. I no longer view each panel as a tiny sail, instead I see one shape that I am trying to encourage to form in the sail by cutting camber in specific panels only.

    Jan, that folding sailboat looks like a lot of fun. It is certainly easier to cut out a square junk sail, but I would argue that rigging one may be more difficult. I am curious as to why you used two yards. May I ask what the purpose of the second topmost one is? 

  • 17 May 2025 14:24
    Reply # 13500329 on 13500036

    I suspect that the shape of the sail in my small folding boat was the result of my laziness. I didn't have to think about the shape of the top panel, and I achieved the intended effect - moving the COE closer to the bow, as is possible in the Split Junk Rig (SJR). And - in the origami SJR, the panels are very easy to cut - so I cut the bluetarp, glued it and hey - let's sail.

    In any case, I sail with a certain sense of guilt about the top panel.

    In moments of reflection, I sometimes wonder if Czesław Marchaj (my fellow countryman, by the way) is rolling over in his grave seeing such a rectangular sail.

    Since I carefully avoid winds stronger than 18 kn - I hope I will not have the opportunity to test this sail in more difficult conditions.

    Last modified: 17 May 2025 14:56 | Anonymous member
       " ...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