Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 15-02-2011, 04:56   #1
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 63
Keel Types and Ballast ?

im interested in knowing about the differing keel types and what they are best suited for. i.e. wing keels?

also would love to hear if there is a ratio of total tonnage of the boat compared to the ballast it should carry for comfortable seakindlyness. i imagine that the more ballast you carry would mean a smoother, but slower ride? im interested in knowing how some of these smaller, lighter 30' to 35' boats with a ballast of under 5000lb would do on a bluewater voyage.
__________________

__________________
bdurham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 06:56   #2
Registered User
 
bangkaboat's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sihanoukville, Cambodia
Boat: looking
Posts: 593
Images: 3
Preferred ratio(B/D) for seakindliness would, imho, be 30% to 50%. Wetted surface, LWL, & hull shape are important in consideration of how fast/slow a boat is, not Bal/Dis ratio. In fact, you will find some boats traditionally considered as ocean or coastal racers with a Bal/Dis of up to 50%, and some real slugs which have a similar ratio. However, the Bal/Dis ratio will give you some indication of how tender or stiff a vessel is, although there are other factors to consider, as well.

Keels - wow, big subject! aside from the "types" of keel foils, the shape of the foils are significant. People have happily sailed offshore with pretty much any keel foil type that exists - full, cutaway(modified), fin, w/bulb, bilge/twin - and you'll not, imho, find consensus on which is "best".

Many boats smaller than 30 foot have made successful offshore passages. Consider the Vega 27(2,000?lbs ballast, 40%) or the Contessa 26(2,300?lbs Ballast, 42%). I owned each of these, as well as a Cal 3-30(4,500lbs/43%). Presently, most of the boats I've been considering for my next purchase average about 35-36 feet(LOA), although the total range is between 30 & 40 feet(LOA). What I try to find is a decent balance between comfort & speed, as I don't want a boat that can't get out of it's own way, nor do I want one that can't maintain course without constant vigilance. I'll PM you with link to much keel info.
Mike
__________________

__________________
bangkaboat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 09:59   #3
cruiser

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 506
You would have to read several books to get a good answer to this question. And then you would have even more questions.
__________________
bob perry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 10:49   #4
Senior Cruiser
 
Blue Stocking's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Georges, Bda
Boat: Rhodes Reliant 41ft
Posts: 4,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob perry View Post
You would have to read several books to get a good answer to this question. And then you would have even more questions.

LOL'

I was tempted to do a "bangkabout" type of post. And then I thought, Naaaw!!- Bob will have the answer.
__________________
so many projects--so little time !!
Blue Stocking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 11:24   #5
Senior Cruiser
 
delmarrey's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Now in Blaine, WA
Boat: Modified Choate 40
Posts: 10,702
Images: 122
The Professional Boat Builder magazine June of 2005 had a great article on keel design, which use to be online but now one has to subscribe.

But here is a real good article that JeffH posted long ago.............

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffH
First of all your question seems to be about appendages. In principle Appendages keep a boat from making leeway. They come in many shapes and sizes. Keels are supposed to be a fixed appendage and centerboards generically are moveable appendages that occur on the centerline but centerboards are just one kind of moveable appendage. In more detail:

Keels:
The earliest form of a keel was simply the backbone of the boat extending through the bottom planking. (Like a Viking ship) That works OK with running and reaching sails but when you try to point toward the wind you slip side wards at great speed. As sails and rigs were invented that allowed boats to point toward the wind the keel was extended below the boat either by planking the hull down to a deeper backbone or by adding dead wood (solid timber below the backbone. A planked down keel permitted the space between the planking to be filled with heavy material (originally stone), which served as ballast keeping the boat from heeling. After a while it was discovered that there were advantages to bolting a high-density cast metal ballast to the outside of the deadwood and interior ballast dropped out of fashion.

Full keels:
These earliest keels pretty much ran from the point of entry at the bow, to the aft most point of exit at the stern. Those are full keels in the fullest sense of the word.

They have some advantages; they theoretically form a long straight plane, which keeps a boat on course better (greater directional or longitudinal stability). If you run aground they spread out the load over a larger area reducing the likelihood of damage. Once really planted they keep the boat from tipping over fore and aft. They are easier to haul and work on. You can spread out the ballast over a longer distance and so they can be shallower for the same stability. You have a greater length to bolt on ballast so it is a theoretically sturdier and simpler connection.

They have some disadvantages; a larger portion of the keel operates near the surface and near the intersection of the hull and keel, which are both turbulent zones. They also have comparatively small leading edges, and the leading edge is the primary generator of lift preventing sideslip. Because of that they need a lot more surface area to generate the same lift. Surface area equates to drag so they need more sail area to achieve the same speed. Long keels tend to be less efficient in terms of lift to drag for other reasons as well. As a boat makes leeway water slips off of the high-pressure side of the keel to the low-pressure side of the keel and creates a turbulent swirl know as a tip vortex. This is drawn behind the boat creating drag in a number of ways. The longer the keel, the bigger the vortex, the greater the drag. So they need more sail area again to overcome this drag. To stand up to this greater sail area the boat needs more ballast and a stronger structure, which is why long keelboats are often heavier, as well. (Of course, then the spiral starts again as more sail area is needed to overcome that additional weight as well. It is the classic weight breeding more weight design cycle) Full keels tend to be much less maneuverable.

Fin keels:
By the classic definition of a fin keel any keel whose bottom is less than 50% of the length of the boat is a fin keel. Fin keels came into being in an effort to reduce drag. Cut away the forefoot or rake the stem, as well as, move the rudderpost forward and rake it sharply and pretty soon you have a fin keel. Today we assume that fin keels mean a separated rudder (skeg hung or spade) but in fact early fin keels had the rudder attached in a worst of all worlds situation. They offer all of the disadvantages of both full and fin keels, but with none of the virtues. Unknowing or unscrupulous brokers will often refer to boats with fin (or near fin) keels as full keel if they have an attached rudder.

Fin keels with separate rudders seem to be the most commonly produced keel form in the US these days. (I could be wrong, there is a resurgence of full keels these days)

Fin keels have some advantages as well. They have less drag as explained above so they typically make less leeway and go faster. You can get the ballast down lower so in theory they are more stable for their weight. They are more maneuverable. They take better advantage of the high efficiency of modern sail plans and materials.

They have some disadvantages as well, many of these have been offset or worked around by modern technology but at some level they are still accurate critiques. They have less directional stability than long keel boats so the tend to wander more under sail. Since directional stability is also a product of the dynamic balance between the sail plan and underbody, in practice they may actually hold a course as well as a full keel. In general though you can expect to make more course adjustments with a fin keel. It is sometimes argued that the lower helm loads requires less energy to make these corrections so a fin keel may also require less energy to maintain course. This I think is a product of the individual boat and could lead to a debate harder to prove than the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

Fin keels are harder to engineer to withstand a hard grounding and when aground they are more likely to flop over on their bow or stern. (Although in 37 years of sailing, I have never heard of anyone actually experiencing this.) Fins typically have deeper draft. They are easier to pivot around and get off in a simple grounding.

Shoal keel
A shoal keel is just a keel that is not as deep as a deep keel. Today the term seems to be applied mostly to shallow fin keels. Shallow full keels seem to be referred to as shoal draft boats. A shallow fin is a tough animal to classify. Like a fin keel with an attached rudder, I really think it has few of the advantages of either a deep fin or a full keel and has many of the worst traits of both full and fin. This can be partially offset by combining a shallow fin with a centerboard, which is a neat set up for shoal draft cruising.

Bulb Keel:
A lot can be done to improve a shallow fin. One way is to add a bulb. A bulb is a cast metal ballast attachment added to the bottom of the keel. They concentrate the ballast lower providing greater stability and sail carrying ability than a simple shallow keel. Traditionally bulbs were torpedo or teardrop shaped. They have been re-contoured to provide some hydrodynamic properties. Recalling the discussion on tip vortex from above. Shallow keels need to be longer horizontally than a deeper fin in order to get enough area to prevent leeway. This means that a shallow longer fin would generate more tip vortex and more drag than a deeper keel. The bulb creates a surface to turn the water aft and prevent it from slipping over the tip of the keel thereby reducing tip vortex. This does not come free since a bulb increases frontal area and surface area.

Wing keels
Wing keels are a specialized type of bulb keel. Instead of a torpedo shaped bulb there are small lead wings more or less perpendicular to the keel. These concentrate weight lower like a bulb and properly designed they also are very efficient in reducing tip vortex. There has been some discussion that wings increase the effective span of the keel when heeled over but this does not seem to be born out in tank testing of the short wings currently being used in production sailboats. Not all wings are created equal. They potentially offer a lot of advantages, but they are heavily dependent on the quality of the design and I really think that many wing designs are not really working to their potential.

Then there is the whole grounding issue. In 2002, the Naval Academy did a study of keel types and grounding. They found that the popular perception that wing keels are harder to free is accurate. In their study, wing keels were extremely harder to free. Straight fins were much easier to free, especially when heeled, and the easiest keel to free was the bulb keel.

Keels that are not really keels:
Swing keels are ballasted centerboards and drop keels are ballasted daggerboards that are ballasted beyond what it takes to submerge themselves. They are really forms of centerboards. More on these in the discussion on centerboards.

Keels that are keels that move.
I said in the introduction that keels do not move. That used to be true. We now have canting keels, which can be pivoted from side to side. They are best designed to be light fins with heavy bulbs that can be canted to windward increasing the effectiveness of the righting aspects of the keel. Just one problem, a keel canted to windward losses efficiency to prevent leeway so they really need other foils to keep leeway in check. I frankly do not like the idea of a canting keel. I think canting keels are too complex and potentially problematic.

Centerboards:
Centerboards are appendages that can be raised and lowered on or near the centerline of the boat. They can rotate up into a trunk or rotate below the boat. Daggerboards are a type of centerboard that raises vertically or near vertically in a trunk. Swing keels are a type of rotating centerboard that actually contains a substantial portion of the boatís ballast. They may be housed in a trunk like a Tartan 27 or 34 or hung below the boat like a Catalina 22. In the case of the Tartan 27 or 34 they are more frequently referred to as a Keel/ Centerboard (abbreviated k/cb). A swing keel is intended to act as a fin keel when lowered and allow some sailing in the partially raised position. My biggest problem with swing keels is that most do not have a positive lock down. In an extreme knockdown they can slam up into the hull greatly reducing the boatís stability. This is a pretty rare occurrence and usually requires big wave action combined with a lot of wind, but I have experienced it out in the Atlantic.

A drop keel is a daggerboard that actually contains a substantial portion of the boatís ballast. These are easier to lock down but can be more easily damaged in a grounding. They generally have better shape than a swing keel and can be more robust, but not always are.

Other appendages: (besides the rudders)
Bilge keels (or twin keels for our English friends) are a pair of keels (usually fins these days) that emerge on either side of the boat and angle out. They offer some advantages. If you let the boat dry out the boat can stand on the two keels and wait the next tide. There are dubious theories about increased efficiency since one is vertical like a good leeway resisting foil and one is canted like a good stability inducing foil. With computer modeling there has been greater success in approaching that theory on large bilge keel boats. While bilge keels do allow shallow draft though, they extremely difficult to free once aground since having the two keels on the ground prevents heeling the boat to get free. In practice bilge keels have enormous wetted surface creating a lot of drag at lower speeds, and produce two very large tip vortexes creating a lot of drag at speed.

Keel Centerboards are a wonderful choice for coastal and offshore cruising. Properly designed they offer nearly the performance of a fin keel, and yet permit access to shallower venues. They can be partially raised to precisely control the center of lateral resistance and therefore offers the ability to have a very neutral helm and great tracking in a wide range of conditions. Properly constructed they have proven to have a long service life. Keel-centerboard boats really proved themselves offshore during the late 1950ís and into 1960ís.They fell out of popularity with the advent of the wing keel in the early 1980ís. The downside is that they are a little harder to maintain, and because the ballast is closer to the center of buoyancy they require more ballast and so end up requiring a higher overall displacement, a higher ballast to displacement ratio, or are more tender, or some combination of the three.

Bilge boards (for the scow guys), are a pair of centerboards that angle out of each side of the boat. They work well on scows but Iíve never been able to really figure out scows anyway. Seriously, You raise the windward board and lower the Leeward one on each tack and because they are close to vertical they can be small and efficient. I still donít get the scow thing.

Last but not least- Leeboards. Leeboards are foils that are bolted to the side of the hull like on Dutch Jachts and Herreshoff Meadowlarks. Phil Bolgerís sharpies use them a lot as well. They have some advantages but they drive me nuts. They are vulnerable in docking and ideally are raised and lowered on each tack also. Some are raised to be hinged feather so they do not need to be raised.
__________________
Faithful are the Wounds of a Friend, but the Kisses of the Enemy are Deceitful! ........
A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves!

Unprepared boaters, end up as floatsum!.......
delmarrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 12:14   #6
Senior Cruiser
 
SkiprJohn's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Kea'au, Big Island, Hawaii
Boat: Cascade, Sloop, 42 - "Casual"
Posts: 14,192
JeffH really nailed it!
kind regards,
__________________
John
SkiprJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 12:49   #7
Senior Cruiser
 
sneuman's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Jamaica
Boat: Tayana 37 Cutter
Posts: 3,167
Images: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob perry View Post
You would have to read several books to get a good answer to this question. And then you would have even more questions.
Reminds me of the famous quote attributed to physicist Richard Feynman:

"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, then you don't understand quantum mechanics."
__________________
Voyage of Symbiosis: http://svsymbiosis.blogspot.com/
sneuman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 13:55   #8
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: between the devil and the deep blue sea
Boat: a sailing boat
Posts: 17,314
All the above, and google out for more. You might like to look up some boat design books (although today there is plenty of good info right on the web).

There is no direct nor unique relationship between the amt of ballast and seaworthiness or stability, you have to consider other factors at the same time - displacement, hull shape, beam, ballast type and location, etc., still most mono-hull seagoing sail boats will have some amount of balast.

Similarly, there is no one kind of keel that will be best for everything. Some boats are built for speed while others for comfortable cruising or for cargo work. They may, and most often will, have different keels.

For offshore cruising boats you will often see ballast to displacement ratio of 25% to 50%, but boats with less / more ballast have been build and sailed nearly everywhere.

In cruising a long and substantial keel is often preferred on the basis of being less prone to damage on impact.

b.
__________________
barnakiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 14:02   #9
Freelance Delivery Skipper..
 
boatman61's Avatar

Community Sponsor
Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK/Portugal
Posts: 20,198
Images: 2
Send a message via Skype™ to boatman61
pirate

A good keel is the one that stays attatched...
A bad keel is the one that falls off....
Thought of the day....
__________________


Born To Be Wild
boatman61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 20:15   #10
KEG
Registered User
 
KEG's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 77
So, how hard is "extremely harder" to free a wing keel when grounded? Is the hassle offset by good design factors in wing keels?

I have been looking at a wing keel boat to buy.

Matthew
__________________
KEG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 20:30   #11
Freelance Delivery Skipper..
 
boatman61's Avatar

Community Sponsor
Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK/Portugal
Posts: 20,198
Images: 2
Send a message via Skype™ to boatman61
pirate

Quote:
Originally Posted by KEG View Post
So, how hard is "extremely harder" to free a wing keel when grounded? Is the hassle offset by good design factors in wing keels?

I have been looking at a wing keel boat to buy.

Matthew
Put it this way.... if you grounded at high water your stuffed till the next higher tide... non wing you can get your main halyard out to your dinghy and use it to cant you over... thus reducing your draught and allowing you to get free... with a wing if you try that you just increase your draft by a few inches or so....
Like I said.... your stuffed... not recommended on a Spring tide...
__________________


Born To Be Wild
boatman61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-02-2011, 20:36   #12
Senior Cruiser
 
atoll's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: gettin naughty on the beach in cornwall
Boat: 63 custom alloy sloop,macwester26,prout snowgoose 37 elite catamaran!
Posts: 9,311
Images: 75
think anchor

Quote:
Originally Posted by KEG View Post
So, how hard is "extremely harder" to free a wing keel when grounded? Is the hassle offset by good design factors in wing keels?

I have been looking at a wing keel boat to buy.

Matthew

a wing keel when grounded has a similar horizontal profile to a bugal or cqr anchor...........

by heeling a boat side to side with a wing on hard ground acheives very little.........
__________________
my catamaran building project updates http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...36#post2502136
atoll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2011, 20:02   #13
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2008
Boat: 74 Tartan 34
Posts: 40
Re: Keel Types and Ballast ?

I have been reading all sorts of stuff on sailboats for the past 30 years. I think i finally have an idea about keels and ballast.

The boats were designed with a keel and ballast for an intended purpose. It is just that simple to me. When I saw the W 60 boats sail in the Chesapeake, they had very long keels with a bulb at the end. They were an extreme design made for a single purpose.

Bob Perry said it right.

Oh BTW I have a Tartan 34. I saw the post by jeff. I just wanted to say something. The swing keel vs the keel centerboarder. The Tartan has a centerboard that retracts into the keel. the centerboard it self is not heavy (as a swing keel would be), it is neutrally buoyant. I say this because it seemed that jeff said that a centerboard will retract into the boat during a knockdown and reduce the stability. (something like that)

The Tartan 34 CB maintains its position when set. If you get knocked down the board does not have much effect on stability anyway. I understand that it is really only is there for windward ability. Besides it does not weigh enough.

The board will stay in position, whether you tip over, or run aground.

A swing keel is heavy and is important for stability.
__________________
lostsoul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2011, 23:47   #14
Senior Cruiser
 
delmarrey's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Now in Blaine, WA
Boat: Modified Choate 40
Posts: 10,702
Images: 122
Re: Keel Types and Ballast ?

I believe Jeff was referring to small sailboats, say under 20', which have little to no ballast weight, except maybe in the keel, which have little to no rigging to hold the keel down.
__________________

__________________
Faithful are the Wounds of a Friend, but the Kisses of the Enemy are Deceitful! ........
A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves!

Unprepared boaters, end up as floatsum!.......
delmarrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
keel

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Keel Types - What Is Your Preference, and Why ? mintyspilot Monohull Sailboats 88 22-11-2010 23:26
Aluminum Keel-Stepped Mast to Iron Keel - Grounded ? endoftheroad Construction, Maintenance & Refit 11 30-09-2010 15:47
KEEL/BALLAST QUESTION?? PLUS EXTRA CREDIT QUESTION ;) stephenronning Monohull Sailboats 3 21-03-2009 04:19
Ballast? spooky alice Construction, Maintenance & Refit 1 08-07-2008 05:58



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 22:48.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.