foilholio wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2019 1:03 pm
I would suggest for that AR 3 bridle rows, as I have had success with that on the A15 (being a similar AR) with no down side. I wonder given the higher AR of many foils on the market why they still use 4 bridle rows.
I have some some bad experiences with three line rows with Speed4dlx. When I worked with one I couldn't get wingtips smooth like there just wasn't enough support with three line rows, and when I observed one other Speed4dlx I saw it there too. So I'm not sure if it has ever been good even on a new kite. Also possibilities to adjust kite and to have variable camber is more limited with three line rows. For high AR (short chord) three line rows is more natural, but even with them only FS uses it.
One possibility might be to have usual four line rows and to cascade B-C together, then speed system could be simple 1:2 and there would be possibility to do more adjustments or to go back to normal 1:2:4 speed system. Too bad line row locations on chord for different configurations are not very compatible, so I think it should have to be designed for 1:2:4 and then just try how well 1:2 would work. Other possibility for 1:2 speed system is to cascade A-B, but it may limit depower, and again line row locations should be different.
Four line rows is just proven concept, it works. For moderate cell counts it is also stronger because it has more line attachment points. High cell count race kite has so many bridle points there is not that issue even with three line rows.
Anyway this is essential design parameter. It must also be remembered that line row count and locations affect directly to inner structures of kite. To have more is better for structure, less is of course lighter in weight and less laborious to make.