foilholio wrote: ↑
Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:51 pm
You raise an interesting point for extra support in the thin part of the profile, but both Inflatables and singles skins have less support there. maybe trying to hold less camber it is important. Your drawings give a good idea to the balances of forces on the mixer and can see clearly why moving B back reduces bar pressure. But also remember center of lift and forces on a wing are not static.
Mixer design is far from settled, mixers with an extra ratio are the new thing.
exactly right. Main Point from me, getting an extra 25% of AoA based on a given bar throw has dramatic impact in possibilities.
kitexpert wrote: ↑
Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:38 am
If "backweighted mixer" is tried on a kite which is designed for normal 1:2:4 mixer it produces high bar pressure and drastic decrease of camber when sheeted in. Not very reasonable and completely against what you try to explain.
exactly right. This works just in special placement of anchor (connection-) points, which are geometrically placed (geomitrically = ideally 0% ... 50% ... 75% ... 100%, in reallity: 5-10%..50%..75%.. 90-95%).
So one point is that you can use this for kite design.
Let's clarify my position:
Assume a Kite with geometric connection points
Any procection area works but lets use a big one to make it clear: 18m2, 21m, 25m!
You take a conventional mixer (A0:B1:C2:Z4 parts of 4, we name it 0:1:2:4, like FS does internally)
On a given bar and a given bar throw you will find the given agility (by measurement). Lets name it ALEPH
Now you change the bar to backweighted (A0:B2:C3:Z4 parts of 4, we name it 0:2:3:4, like FS does internally). But Fore! Now you have to increase A length first by a quarter of the Barthrow.
Now you make the agility check again. What will you find?
At this point you can decide:
Whether you sell a more agile kite ...
...or get rid of you 60cm bar product at all in yr product line
... or take this advantage and make a new, deeper profiled kite which has the advantage of beeing much more long term stable because a deeper profile at a given projection area leeds to a narrower width. Narrower width kites have more fabrication tolerance in cloth and lines...
...or just use your race bar!
I've never seen this, the conjunction of geometric connection points at the kite and a 1:2:3:4 mixer to improve the leverage between barthrow and AoA
with a fixed A and a steered Z.
All this gear improvement efforts I know are mainly based on a pulleyd Z (steering line on C, which here in forum called malabar) which have dramatic disadvantages which disallow their use (tried them and rejected, because reverse start option is lost, and ugly unrestorable backflips happend on the water...) . 2:1 bar is out of scope for all, I hope...
just to get in my actual world...
I use it for pansh, because it has the ability (geometric designed connection points in the center) to use it. Pansh's A15's original performance is (my personal opinion) so lousy, that that it can definately need a goood tweak. Potential is there I feel.
We all searching for that in this thread.