richard Posted June 23, 2003 Posted June 23, 2003 Followed Ray's your story about the ballast with much interest. I am just starting to build my weekender - just 1 layer of the keel done. What do you think about replacing part of the inner layer of the keel with ballast (iron plates). There is room enough and it avoids messing up of the hydrodynamics of the keel shape. The problem is where to put the ballast - start and stop station?? I can always finetune inside on the bottom of the boat. Richard Quote
Andrew Posted June 23, 2003 Posted June 23, 2003 Richard I was thinking much the same thing myself - I've just finished putting my keel together - but a few things have kept me from doing this... these are 1) permanent weight - it makes the boat harder to move when building and trailer 2) I don't live near the sea, and the lakes I am near are small and shallow so I doubt that extra ballast will be of a lot of use to me - (when I do sail around the world it will be in my home built 40' :shock: ) 3) I'm doing what the Stevensons tell us - try it before you start to mod it too much. Just my 2 cents.... But remember - it's YOUR boat, YOU can do with it as you please :wink: Andrew Quote
Barry Pyeatt Posted June 23, 2003 Posted June 23, 2003 Richard, I think you need to realize what Ray's stated goal was to start with. He didn't want the boat to be quite as tippy when he was at anchor. He wanted it to feel more like a much heavier ballasted boat. He was used to a ballasted boat with a wider hull design. Hard to accomplish in a dory type hull with a narrow stern section. He also stated that he didn't care much for it heeling over quite as much under sail. Granted both of these things are conditions that are worth looking into. Ballast will help keep it a little more upright and offer more stability at anchor due to the additional weight down low. I really don't think it is necessary, but it appears that it is the solution for him. I question the advisability of adding iron or steel plates between the keel layers without some encapsulation to prevent them from causing rot problems with temperature changes. Lead doesn't have that issue with it. Most of the others have simply placed their batteries in the forepeak to bring the bow down so the chines work as designed. One of the other issues is pounding in heavy seas because the weight is in the rear of the boat which brings the bow out of the water. That causes the flat bottom to slap against the waves causing a pounding. Putting the weight forward eliminates that problem as well. For most people the weight of a single marine battery makes a significant difference when it is placed in the forepeak area. On the bottom, screwed down in a battery case is preferable. It can have a false floor placed over it to separate the anchor, line, etc. from the battery area. That will allow you to use the larger space above it and keep the area cleaner. It will also help bring the bow down. The thing that makes this type of hull work so well is the combination of the keel and hard chines on the hull. When the boat heels over the chine begins to act like an additional keel. The boat responds. Heeling over much beyond about 15 degrees doesn't accomplish much if anything more. If you reach the point that the toe rail is in the water continuously, you probably should probably reef the mainsail so you are not so overpowered. It isn't impossible to turn a Weekender over, but it doesn't have to happen either. With good sail handling techniques and learning how to handle the Weekender in a broad range of conditions will prevent that from ever happening. It is a good design. I've been in heavy water with high winds in Hawaii in one and never felt uncomfortable during the sail. So I don't know if adding ballast will accomplish that much more. But we are all interested in seeing the results. Quote
Barry Pyeatt Posted June 23, 2003 Posted June 23, 2003 Ray, Wish I were closer too. I would love to experience the results of your research and trial and error efforts. I completely respect the course you have taken and your reasoning behind it. It is all very logical and methodical in light of your desire to have it more stable. My marine architect buddy kinda "off the wall" remarked after reading some of your posts. Maybe what he really needs is a tri-hull at rest and a deep ballasted keel design with a wider transom when sailing. Well, life is a series of compromises. And maybe you have found a good one for you with the bulb. I will try it un ballasted for awhile and then try the ballast. Should be interesting. Quote
TexasPhil Posted June 24, 2003 Posted June 24, 2003 Ray, I think you gotta go on tour with the bulbs! Quote
richard Posted June 24, 2003 Author Posted June 24, 2003 Thanks folks, I think I will first build it without ballast and see afterwards Richard Quote
John Teetsel Posted June 24, 2003 Posted June 24, 2003 Since you're in the early stages of construction, why not consider widening the stern by a few inches? It goes a long way to adding stability with a small sacrifice in speed, no appreciable change in looks and adds considerably to the room and comfort in the cockpit. I added 8" at the stern (4" each side) and gradually worked back to the stock dimensions at station #8 on the hull bottom. Similar on the deck measurements. Standard at station #11 adding 4 Quote
richard Posted June 24, 2003 Author Posted June 24, 2003 John, Can you clarify a bit on this enlargement? Richard Quote
John Teetsel Posted June 24, 2003 Posted June 24, 2003 Sure Richard, it's pretty simple really. The problem is that the boat gets stern down/bow up as weight (people in most cases) piles into the cockpit. One solution is to counter this weight aft with weight forward and our friend Beaker has done this most ingeniously with his ballast bulbs. Another solution is to make the boat capable of carrying more weight aft by widening the stern which, coincidentally, increases the overall stability of the boat. The downside is that it slows the boat a bit, but these aren Quote
buck Posted June 25, 2003 Posted June 25, 2003 My two cents worth?: I came from a comparitively stable racing dinghy an Olyimpic class Finn to the Weekender. The finn wasa good cruiser I could even stand on the foredeck. To me the Weekender is like a keeler. I can easilymove around on the foredeck with my 6' 189 lb frame to haul up the sails and get the anchor up. Normally I scamper back over the roof with little trouble. AS for sailing I find my unweighted weekender a trifle heavy to push off sandbars etc but inherantly stable. One quick gust I got sent me over 30 degrees until I let the mainsheet go but the rest of the time its been great. Most days under 7knots I have to sit on the leeside to make it heel. With my sons aboard (3 of, another 300lbs) it is also very stable and have to have several peole on the lee side to get anywhere near a 15 degree angle. For 16' its a very stable boat. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.