Te-PK work in progress
Camp cruiser / coastal cruiser (in fair weather) for 2 adults and a child.Easy construction and low cost. Crabclaw rigged. Deck pod and covered helm for bad weather/shade. Some storage in the hulls. Sealed bulkheads and crash box’. Possibly demountable deck pod. Solid mast stays.
Deep v hulls.
Vaka Loa 6m - Lwl 5.92m.
Ama Loa 4.78m - Lwl 4.70m.
Boa 3.5m.
Hull beam 0.50m.
HB wl 0.34m.
HB/Lr 17.64.
Center line to CL 3.0m.
Boat Weight 350kg. (hulls 200kg - deck pod 100kg - rest 50kg).
Displacement 400kg +-
Steering - sweep and oar - initially at least….
Windage 10%.....
Draft 0.30m / 0.35m.
WSA @ 0.30m = 6.29m sq. @ 0.35 = 7.43m sq.
CP 0.70.
SA 10m sq. Reefable to 6.5m sq and 3m sq.’
Mast 5m.
12 - 13 sheets of ply - not including beams (not sure of construction yet).
The pod gives sitting headroom and (cramped) space for 2 to lie down and some kit.
Not sure of the sail size - will it be enough in light winds and too much in strong winds - and can one reef a crab claw sail properly?
Mast to be set on centre beam, to align with oar to windward of the vaka.
Are Te puke’s pacific proa’s, wtw proa’s or a hybrid?
All criticism and help welcome!
Alex.
Sorry about the quality of the drawings - taking pictures of them.
I like the drawings, Alex. Tepuke are solidly pacific proa, just a specific subtype. I suppose I could see your point if you want to call it a hybrid since the hut hangs out toward windward a little bit.
A couple of questions. Why the solid mast? Why are the hulls full width until the extreme ends instead of a more gradual taper? What’s the beam of the ama: it looks beamy? The ama of a pacific proa should generally have at least a similar B:L ratio as the main hull if not smaller.
I’ve looked for solutions to reefing crab claws; I didn’t find any useable examples. The brailing line or a smaller sail is all there is. You can see the challenge with it: no easy way to reef or furl.
The solid mast is for simplicity - less moving bits - but not a fixed idea - still work in progress…. With solid stays tho’,it’d help if caught aback? Might also play with the idea of a tacking outrigger. The beams and hull connections have yet to be thought through. The ama has the same beam as the Vaka. HB/Lr of 13.82. Like the idea of buoyancy - again for being caught aback and that i’ve placed the pod further over than is usual. Too much drag?
Could one not simply use sail ties - to bottom boom - to reef cc? I made a small model sail to play with but never thought to try it. My kid since destroyed it…...
Probably no one in recent history has logged as many miles with a small oceanic lateen (crab claw) rig than Chris Grill on his stretched T2. In the past six months he has sailed from Vera Cruz down to Belize, sleeping on the canoe and sometimes the beach. He does not reef the sail but has a smaller rig lashed onboard. He seldom seems to use it though as his experience and skill grows. His blog of the last year should be made into a book (and a movie).
Start here: http://grillabongquixotic.wordpress.com/2011/07/02/a-report-on-my-version-of-gary-dierking´s-t2-pacific-flying-proa/
And then read all of the entries following it.
Thanks Gary - have been following his blog - seriously impressive. It was one of the reasons for going with the solid deck pod!!! His didn’t sound like much fun….... Bought your book and love the T2. Need to carry more weight too. The crumpetina may want to go with.
(meant to put the other post in this thread - sorry - computer challenged….. could it be moved?).
Posting a pic of a mast concept - i don’t like the idea of shunting / moving the sail over - so what if i had 2?
2 smaller masts in an x - lashed to the beam and set into the vaka, as well as stayed to the deck or pod.
I must confess it’s also a concept for a larger proa, where a bigger rig may be easier to do this way.
The idea is simple (i hope) - drop 1 sail and raise the other.
If 1 sail is damaged, then you have another to use while mending it.
I realise that it’s more weight and windage , but thinking more of a cruiser than a racer.
As requested, Alex, albeit rather late, here is the full size version of my avatar. It is a preliminary drawing for what became “Pookie”. It was drawn by Michael Schacht (as only he can) from a concept I had for a fast and fun (same thing!) beach camping proa using the Reef (Santa Cruz) Islands Teh Puke proa as inspiration.
These proas are the ultimate in minimalist design, I thought, and therefore also suited my minimalist resources 😊
I originally conceived it as a moulded fibreglass proa as fibreglass moulding is/was my trade. The beams hinge in the middle and along with the hulls and were to be moulded fibreglass. The hulls were to be made from a tapering bow section and a straight run middle section which could mould different lengths for the different length hulls. The bows were detachable using an internal moulded conical spigot to take the forces and a single bolt at the end of it to maintain each one in place. The beams could also be unbolted from the hulls if needs be.
All this made for a simple, lightweight but sizeable beach proa at 28’ long that could be easily constructed, assembled, transported over road and stored at home. That was the plan, anyway 😊
Thanks - GOOD LOOKING proa !!!!
Hi Alex,
if you want to develop a modern Teh Puke, it’s important to see the relationships of the boat dimensions/weight to the hut size. For these old massive dugouts, sailing in steady wind condtions, windage was no problem. If you want to transfer this concept to our days you should not forget this. This crosses my mind, as I saw the pics of Te-PK.
The beautiful sketch from Michaels 28’ Teh Pookie shows only a small open cabin for two crew. IMO a modern daysailor in Teh Puke style which offers minimum accomodations for a crew of four needs in minimum a length of 35’ to 40’. As cruiser you have to think about a length of 45’ to 50’. Not only by the above named relationships, for esthetics too 😊
I agree with Othmar regarding aesthetics and accommodation and size relationships. The originals ranged from 40’ to 60’ mostly from what I have read.
I think they come into their own when you have minimal accommodation needs to start with but you also need a sizable “footprint” on the water for seaworthiness needs like me living here on Bass Strait.
Yeah - i know. It doesn’t work as a half size concept….. :( .
Re-designing…...
Hi - Adam - didn’t reply to the question on the fullness of hull to the ends….
I had several thoughts on this - 1 - the original tepuke has hulls like this. 2 so do tankers and torpedoes…...
3 - it increases the interior volume / useable space / displacement.
With a fine stem that is blunt / quickly moves into the hull - the hull being straight sided - the bow creates less wave and less resistance…..
I have a sloot (don’t know the English - but it is a water channel to give water to my farm.) that runs at 1.5 knots - i used it as a test tank and built a model to test in it - results were good!!
The main idea behind my idea is ease of build - not the best starting point for a boat - but ease of build also includes low cost.
I am trying to maximise the minimum.
There are polynesian canoes designed like this - old and modern that work.
Alex,
I think tepuke are one fine example of a boat whose parts are synergistic yet each part is designed to do its job best. I.e. the hull has one job only; there is no compromise between hydrodynamics and accomodation; the accomodations are taken care of by the shelter.
That said, there are reasons to compromise the hydrodynamics like you said with ease of construction. Maybe you’ve found a good balance there from what you said, but it’s my observation that efficient hull shapes generally taper gradually, especially in designs which are meant to “exceed the hullspeed.” But you don’t have to take my word for it. Maybe you’ve seen what Russel Brown endorsed as a good ama shape after he saw it in action: It’s the one on Harmen Hielkema’s proa; it’s shown here from below toward the bottom (green vaka, white ama). http://harmenhielkema.blogspot.com/search/label/Toroa Notice the taper that never stops through its whole length.
Don’t let that discourage you if you decide to keep those full ends; it’s just my opinion from limited evidence. If we all copied each other where would innovation come from?
Hi - Adam - didn’t reply to the question on the fullness of hull to the ends….
I had several thoughts on this - 1 - the original tepuke has hulls like this. 2 so do tankers and torpedoes…...
3 - it increases the interior volume / useable space / displacement.
...
The main idea behind my idea is ease of build - not the best starting point for a boat - but ease of build also includes low cost.
Hi Alex,
do you know the 30 years old 50 ’ design “About face”? It may hit your intentions of hull design:
http://wikiproa.pbworks.com/w/page/14592436/About-Face
My present boat I made in that way like you said in your last paragraph. With straight lines over half the length. I think, if you have a L:B ration over 15:1 there will be at last hardly a measurable difference to a fully curved design:
http://www.multihull.de/proa/p8/p8.htm
Othmar
I’m still stuck on 16:1 + but the downside is lack of hull space - for people at least. Again this depends on length/size…. Therefore the deckhouse.
Plenty of ama’s are also pretty full throughout - Gary Dierkings Ama Nui comes to mind.
I don’t think the shape would work unless v shaped - either fully or minimal flat bottomed.