[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference unifix::sailing

Title:SAILING
Notice:Please read Note 2.* before participating in this conference
Moderator:UNIFIX::BERENS
Created:Wed Jul 01 1992
Last Modified:Mon Jun 02 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2299
Total number of notes:20724

1816.0. "calculating ballast & righting" by NZOMIS::MITCHELL () Tue Dec 03 1991 20:51

    Does anyone have a simple formula for calculating the amount of ballast
    required for a keel or centre plate?
    
    I am in the last stages of building a 25 foot racing trailer yacht, the
    design of which is based on a yacht I have recently sold. 
    
    Whilst the hull shapes and sail area are similair, we have constructed
    the new boat out of cedar strip with an S Glass laminate. We believe
    the new boat is probably lighter by half than the old.  Also the old
    centreplate was of cast iron construction weighing some 440 lbs , with a
    200 bulb attached to the bottom.
    
    The new design calls for an ultra light plate, also constructed of
    Cedar covered in an S Glass laminate, with an internal steel section to
    support the only real ballast, being the bulb.
    
    Whilst we can calculate an approximate weight for the bulb based on our
    past experience with the previous boat, I would be interested if any
    applied mathematics might suggest more or less than our experience
    would suggest.
    
    I am told that someone with the qualifications of a naval architect
    would most probably have a formula... If so what parameters are needed?
    
    I suspect sail area, beam, water line length, draught, and mast height
    are all factors.
    
    Crew weight would also be considered...
    
    The boat is not for family cruising, so its really a desire on my part
    to extract a ballast figure that would provide optimum performance
    within a reasonable self righting index.
    
    With the old boat we did occasionally get knocked down flat, and self
    righted OK.... 
    
    Our own calculations suggest we could retain the same righting moment
    by decreasing the overall ballast, given that it will now all be located at
    the most efficient postion... However I am curious to know whether
    increasing the ballast might actually generate more drive once the boat
    reaches a certain angle of heel?
    
    Any helpful comments would be appreciated.
    
    Glen.
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1816.1Conceptual, if not formulaic replySELECT::SPENCERWed Dec 04 1991 14:2062
Well, in terms of addressing complexity, you certainly can take a big step
off the end of the dock (at low tide) with this one...or perhaps just try
a walk down the beach. 

There are many ways to calculate a new ballast amount; it depends on your 
objectives, which probably depend somewhat at least on how and why the 
hull shape was designed.  I'd suggest a review of Skene's Elements of
Yacht Design to put things in perspective before embarking wholeheartedly
on this venture, however.  Here are some thoughts, though: 

Will the ballast CG be at the same depth below the WL as before?  Less
weight lower down could have the same righting moment, excluding any lift
effect of the keel section. 

Is keel or bulb strut section shape an issue at all?  (Will added length
increase lift, etc?) 

One simple method (walk down the beach):  Assume the hull was designed to
sail optimally at a certain WL.  You need only to ballast the hull enough
to meet the original WL...the added ballast will equal the savings in hull
weight.  It'll float on the DWL, though probably not sail at the heel 
angle that it may have been designed for in a given set of conditions.  
That may not be bad; it may simply not matter enough to matter.

4)  Another less simple method (step off the dock):  Assume the hull was
designed to sail at an optimal heel angle.  Here the name of the game is
to balance the ballast weight and lever arm to reproduce the original's
righting moment.  Options include: 

1. Add ballast to bring total disp up to orig; shorten lever arm.
   ...Could make for a much stiffer boat.

2. Maintain orig ballast (and design, if  wished); shorten lever arm, 
	but less than above.
   ...Match orig stiffness, but less wetted surface (less disp floats higher.)

3. Reduce the ballast some, and keep orig lever arm.
   ...Ditto #2 above.  

4. Reduce the ballast more, and lengthen lever arm.
   ...Ditto #2 above.

Since changes in any single factor impact other factors and overall
performance (stiffness; roll and pitch rates; different lift and helm due
to immersed hull shape at each angle of heel, not to mention LWL....) 

>>>    I suspect sail area, beam, water line length, draught, and mast height
>>>    are all factors.

There are a variety of calculations, many of which you can approximate 
adequately yourself, shown in Skene's.  Metacentric height, etc, etc.
    
Bottom line is that even a thorough analysis more often than not gets 
tested and truly discovered for the first time only on the water.  If it 
was more of a science, they'd have figured out 12-meters and AC boats long 
ago.  Figuring out a good answer based on static stability figures often 
doesn't translate predictably into dynamic characteristics.  Aim for a 
good approximation, and figure you'll tune the formula mid-season.

Sounds like a really fun problem to fiddle with!

J.