Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 9th December 2007, 02:56 PM   #51
Floyd
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Default

Sailquick
You are right about Uffa Fox ; think you`ll find he also designed a few model boats/cats.One of which was a cat which I had as a kid.
Anyway
I do think you could be totally correct and I`ve often wondered myself how surfers hang ten; not sure its anything to do with centre of planing but it could be.
My point really was that we just accept these statements without any real data/explanation to confirm.
Much of stuff I hjave read indicates that over last 15 years or so planing has conme to be looked at more simply as momentum transfer.(and along entire length)Think I quoted one of papers I found.Theres even been rumours in aero world that many of the accepted theories of lift are poor representations of what actually happens. (See tip vortices and lift)
Anyway it must be bad weather everywhere spending so much time on here.
Good sailing.

We cant just say high AR are more efficient.
Floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2007, 06:17 PM   #52
Floyd
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Talking

Windstock
Notice Naiomi is stood to rear of ironing board;giving ideal angle of attack with the prerequisite 1.5 AR. Cant make out wether boards an F2 or Mistral.Cant be a *B , its going too fast. Second one could be *B but he`s oversheeted anyway.
Nice pics.
Good sailing.
Floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2007, 10:25 PM   #53
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Who won? What's the, verdict? Conclusion? Final score?

I'm still confused! Am i the only one still confused?

What is "AR"?

Does an apollo have "AR"?

If windstock is a "NEW MEMBER" how does he know who the unregistered posters are?
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2007, 05:16 PM   #54
Floyd
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Default

Nobody won !
No; we`re all confused.
AR- Aspect ratio. Of sail ; luff squared divided by area.Of board; planing width divided by planing length.
Yes
Dont know .
Its cold.
Floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2007, 05:00 AM   #55
C Guy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It wasn't a competition, so no one won or lost.

As far as I can see, Floyd is right and we can't just say that high aspect is more efficient. It's just more efficient for some purposes. The high aspect planing surface does work and for much the same sort of reason as skinny wings work (ie reduction in tip loss etc).

Savitsky's 1964 paper has a good way of looking at it - if you had an extremely wide span planing surface, the tip loss is minute and almost all of the effect of the water being shoved down is acting to lift the board.

In contrast, if you had a very long skinny surface, basically all the water slips out to the side so there's nothing underneath to lift the board up. Sure, there IS actually water underneath but its effect is diffused by distance - just like the fact that we don't get squashed by air being shoved down underneath a jumbo passing overhead

But where Floyd is right to say that we may be being oversold the high aspect effect is that the marketing spin ignores the downsides - ie while induced drag when planing DROPS by the square of the width, form drag when not planing INCREASES by about the square of the width and wavemaking drag is increased by a short fat surface. And to get to plan, we have to overcome form drag, wavemaking drag etc.

So skinny works in some conditions, fat in others, and to say that fat = good is surely wrong. And for my two cents worth, we need to get away from emphasising top end speed in planing conditions so the value of long and skinny can't be overlooked.

PS Floyd, it is fascinating looking at the way people look at lift - momentum transfer seems cool, but circulation and Euler equations do my head in! :-)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2007, 05:06 AM   #56
C Guy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Also, I'm not an aerodynamicist's underpants and so therefore I know nothing; it's just that sometimes I get to ask those who do know their stuff.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2007, 07:39 AM   #57
steveC
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 639
Default

I'm not so capable that I understand the real scientific/technical stuff, but my "off the top" take is that high or low aspect leverage is kind of relative to the playing field. I guess it depends on your focus. Needless to say, if it's really cranking, the narrow emphasis has obvious advantages relative to control. In light stuff, the opposite is true.

I think that it's fair to say that both wide and narrow width boards have a distinct place in the picture. A skewed perspective one way or another will affect the performance envelope. Of course, a steely nature will often figure too in the outcome.
steveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2007, 08:50 PM   #58
Ken
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 799
Default

In conclusion - for the regular folks:

Wide = quick to plane, but hits the wall at some point in high winds (39 knots - see GPSwindsurfing.com). Wow!!!!!

Skinny = slow to plane, but keeps going faster in the high winds (50 knots).
Ken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2007, 12:46 AM   #59
Expander
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Santa Croce lake, Italy
Posts: 132
Default

--

A small contribuition about ASPECT RATIO issue and relative planning abilities of a windsurfing board.


About Aspect Ratio (AR).

Aspect ratio (AR) is an indicator of the general performance of an (hydro) aerodynamic surface.
In aerodynamics, the Aspect Ratio of a wing is defined as the square of the span divided by the wing area.
It is a measure of how long and slender a wing is from tip to tip.
"HIGH" Aspect Ratio aircraft wing indicates long, narrow wings, whereas a "LOW" Aspect Ratio wing is short and stubby.




In windsurfing board design, "HIGH" Aspect Ratio term indicates wide Formula boards while "LOW" Aspect Ratio term indicates Slalom narrow boards.




In these context, in air or in water, an HIGHER Aspect Ratio has pratical effect of increasing LIFT (above all when angle of attack increases).
An analytic confirmation could be verify just considering LIFT (L) and DRAG (D) of a hydro/aerodynamic surface, and plotting a graph to see how COEFFICIENT OF LIFT (CL), given from ratio of Lift over Drag (L/D), works for surfaces with a HIGH and LOW Aspect Ratio (AR):




It is clear that, for a surface with HIGH value of AR (graph on left), Coefficient of Lift (red curves) is much higher than a surface with LOW value of AR (graph on right).
At same Coefficient of Lift, higher is L/D ratio, MORE efficient is a surface.
Therefore, the HIGH Aspect Ratio surface (Glider wing or Formula windsurfing board) will glide much further and will be characterized by better skimming abilities than a LOW AR surface, above all when wind is in the low-end and board is crossing from full displacement to skimming condition.

Schematizing,

IN AERODYNAMICS:

HIGH Aspect Ratio wing --> Higher Lift Coefficient --> lower stalling angle of attack (Gliders);
LOW Aspect Ratio wing --> Lower Lift Coefficient --> high stalling angle of attack (Fighter Jets)

or, IN WINDSURFING BOARD DESIGN:

HIGH Aspect Ratio board --> Higher Lift Coefficient --> better low-end planning abilities (Formula);
LOW Aspect Ratio board --> Lower Lift Coefficient --> better speed performances (Slalom).

A really empirical confirmation of better efficiency of a HIGH Aspect Ratio surface on a LOWER one is given by different kind of FLAGS: yes, I'm speaking about very common flags like ones visible in every beach in summer season; well, like visible in following drawing, a HIGH AR flag is more efficient of LOW AR flag also when wind is weak or tenuos for other one (it goes on flapping while other flag is become flabby).



I hope this contribuition could be useful to clarify entire matter.


- EXPANDER.

Last edited by Expander; 14th December 2007 at 03:19 AM.
Expander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2007, 01:07 AM   #60
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs up

expander-
thanks for the great graphics
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
None

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 03:42 AM.