Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.

htm

6 Rudder Design

6.1 Assumptions and Equations Used in the Design and Analysis of the Rudders.

The rudder should have as small an area as possible to minimise drag. However, if the rudder is too small the
sailor will loose control of the boat at low speeds. Determining an acceptable rudder size is therefore an
empirical exercise. A standard rudder design shall be analysed to provide acceptable characteristics. An
equivalent rudder can then be designed that will also give an acceptable level of control.

In the analysis of the rudder designs, the following assumptions and equations are used:-

All rudders have an elliptical spanwise chord distribution and do not twist or deflect.

b = minor axis of the foil

a = half the major axis of the foil

S = area of the foil

S= p a b / 4

ARg = geometric aspect ratio

ARg = a2 / S

The effective aspect ratio of the rudder ARe is assumed to be twice the geometric aspect ratio due to the free
surface boundary. Although the free surface is not a solid boundary it shall be assumed to mirror the rudder
and hence

ARe = 2 ´ ARg = 2 ´ a2 / S

1 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

A transverse foil at the tip of the rudder (used to increase longitudinal stability - see Chapter 3 ) will increase
the effective aspect ratio of the rudder. From figure 6.1, The foil increases the effective aspect ratio by
approximately 1.3.

\ ARe = 2.6 a2 / S

if the elliptical rudder has a transverse foil at its tip.

The transverse foil will increase the total drag of the rudder but this drag shall be ignored when rudder designs
are compared.

The rudders have elliptical plan forms so the following relationships are true.

CL = k a / [ 1 + ( 2 / ARe )]

where

a = angle of attack
k = slope of the lift of the section with angle of attack graph = dL / da
CL = coefficient of lift
ARe = effective aspects ratio

CDI = CL2 / p ARe

CD = DDP + DDI

where

CD = total coefficient at drag

CDI = coefficient of induced drag
CDP = coefficient of profile drag evaluated from graphs reprinted from "The Theory of Wing Sections" shown
in figure 6.2 and 6.3

The maximum section thickness is 12% of the cord length. "From the data for the NACA four and five digit
wing sections it appears that the maximum lift coefficients are the greatest for a thickness ration of 12 per
cent." Theory of Wing Sections. As the maximum lift is a function of area, and maximum lift coefficient for
the minimum area, the sections with the maximum lift coefficients must be used.

6.2 Analysis of 4 Different Rudder Designs

Standard Rudder

No transverse foil
section = NACA 0012
a = 0.65m

2 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

b = 0.2m

S = p ´ 0.65 ´ 0.2 / 4 = 0.1021m2

ARe = 2 ´ 0.652 / 0.1021 = 8.28

k = 1.3 / 12

CL = 1.3 a / [12 ´ ( 1 2 / 8.28 )] = 0.08726 a

CDI = CL2 / ( p ´ 8.28 ) = 2.927´ 10-4 x a 2

Table 6.1

Standard rudder design lift and drag characteristics.

a CDP CDI CD CL CL/CD

0 0.0058 0 0.0058 0 0

2 0.006 1.171 x 10-3 0.00717 0.1745 24.3

4 0.0066 4.863 x 10-3 0.0113 0.3490 30.9

6 0.008 0.01054 0.0185 0.5235 28.3

8 0.0095 0.01873 0.0282 0.6981 24.8

10 0.011 0.02927 0.0403 0.8726 21.7

3 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

Design 1

Transverse foil fitted

section = NACA 0012
a = 0.65 m
b = 0.20 m

S = p ´ 0.65 ´ 0.2 / 4 = 0.1021

ARe = 2.6 ´ 0.652 / 0.1021 = 10.75

k = 1.3 / 12

CL = 1.3 ´ a / [12 ´ (1 + 2 /10.75 )] = 0.09134 a

CDI = CL2 / ( p ´ 10.75) = 2.470´ 10-4 x a 2

Table 6.2

Design 1 rudder lift and drag characteristics.

a CDP CDI CD CL CL/CD

0 0.0058 0 0.0058 0 0

2 0.006 9.881´ 10-4 6.988´ 10-3 0.1827 26.1

4 0.0066 3.953´ 10-3 0.01055 0.3654 34.6

6 0.008 8.893´ 10-3 0.01689 0.5480 32.4

8 0.0095 0.01581 0.02531 0.7307 28.9

10 0.011 0.02470 0.03570 0.9134 25.6

4 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

Design 2

Transverse foil fitted

section = NACA 0012
a = 0.686 m
b = 0.189 m

S = p ´ 0.686 ´ 0.189 / 4 = 0.1021

ARe = 2.6 ´ 0.6862 / 0.1021 = 12

k = 1.3 / 12

CL = 1.3 a / [ 12 ´ ( 1 + 2 / 12 )] = 0.09286 a

CDI = CL2 / ( p ´ 12 ) = 2.287´ 10-4 x a 2

Table 6.3

Design 2 rudder lift and drag characteristics.

a CDP CDI CD CL CL/CD

0 0.0058 0 0.0058 0 0

2 0.006 9.149´ 10-4 6.9149´ 10-3 0.1857 26.9

4 0.0066 3.659´ 10-3 0.01026 0.3714 36.2

6 0.008 8.234´ 10-3 0.01623 0.5571 34.3

5 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

8 0.0095 0.01464 0.02414 0.7429 30.8

10 0.011 0.02287 0.03387 0.9286 27.4

Design 3

Transverse foil fitted

section = NACA 64 - 012
a = 0.686 m
b = 0.189 m

S = p ´ 0.686 ´ 0.189 / 4 = 0.1021

ARe = 2.6 ´ 0.6862 / 0.1021= 12

k = 0.9 / 8

CL = 0.9 a / [ 8 ´ ( 1 + 2 / 12 )] = 0.09643 a

CDI = CL2 / p ´ 12 = 2.467´ 10-4 µ 2

Table 6.4

Design 3 rudder lift and drag characteristics.

a CDP CDI CD CL CL/CD

0 0.005 0 0.005 0 0

2 0.005 9.866´ 10-4 5.987´ 10-3 0.1929 32.2

6 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

4 0.008 3.946´ 10-3 0.01195 0.3857 32.3

6 0.0095 8.879´ 10-3 0.01838 0.5786 31.5

8 0.012 0.01579 0.02779 0.7714 27.8

10 0.0145 0.02466 0.03916 0.9643 24.6

6.3 Rudder Design Discussion and Conclusions.

It is clear from the graph in figure 6.2 comparing the designs that the effective aspect ratio has a large effect
on the performance of the rudder. Of the designs presented, Design 2 is the best. Design 3 may be better when
the angle of attack is below 3° (maybe 60% of the time) but NACA 64-012 section has a lower value of CL
maximum; so for the same maximum lift the rudder would have to be larger. For this reason the NACA 0012
section would appear to be optimum.

A limited factor in the design of the foils is the structural consideration. Reducing b by 8% reduces the
thickness of the foil by 8%. This means the second moment of area has decreased by (0.923) 22%. The centre
of pressure has moved down the foil due to the increase in aspect ratio which increases the bending moment
on the foil. The aspect ratio is therefore limited by structural considerations. It shall be assumed that an
effective aspect ratio of 12 is achievable without an excessively heavy structure.

The profile of the rudder should be modified to a crescent form as seen in "Letters to Nature". This type of
plan form is shown to have 4.3% less induced drag for 1.5% less lift than the standard rudder shape (with a
straight trailing edge) at a = 4%.

The theoretical calculated values of lift and drag are based on a plan form with a straight ¼ cord line (wing 1)
and therefore must be modified to take account of plan form

Diagram of foil profiles

(not available on this site at present)

7 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

Table 6.5

Correction factors for profile shape on rudder lift and drag coefficients.

Wing CDI CL fI fL

1 0.00531 0.34157 1 1

2 0.00510 0.34236 0.96 1.002

3 0.00475 0.33714 0.89 0.987

The above data helps to support the analysis of the effect of angle of sweep in Chapter 5. Wing 3 has a larger
effective angle of sweep than Wing 1 and has less induced drag for less lift.

Taking into account the profile of rudders, the lift and drag can be calculated as follows.

L = ½ ´ r ´ V2 ´ S ´ fL ´ CL

where

r = density of water = 1025 kg / m3

V = velocity taken as 5 knots = 2.87 m/s
S = area of foil = 0.1021m2
FL = correction factor
CL = coefficient of lift

D = ½ r V2 S(CDP + fI CDI)

where

CDP = coefficient of profile drag taken from graph for section

CDI = coefficient of induced drag
fI = correction factor

The final design can be compared to the original rudder and actual values of lift and drag compared. The drag
of the transverse foil, which offsets the drag curve, can be included. (Note a for transverse foil assumed to be
0° .)

Ideally the boat would be equipped with 2 rudders, one without a foil for light winds and one with a foil for

8 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

stronger winds where longitudinal stability is a problem.

Standard Rudder

(no transverse foil)

ARe = 8.28
S = 0.1021 m2
section = NACA 0012

Table 6.6

Actual values of lift and drag for a Standard rudder at 5 knots.

a CDP fI CDI fL CL D L
Newtons Newtons

0 0.0058 0 0 2.5 0

2 0.006 1.124´ 10-3 0.1748 3.1 75

4 0.0066 4.496´ 10-3 0.3497 4.8 151

6 0.008 0.01012 0.5245 7.8 226

8 0.0095 0.01798 0.6995 11.8 302

10 0.011 0.02810 0.8743 16.9 377

Design 2

(with transverse foil at zero angle of attack)

CDI for transverse foil = 0
CDP = 0.004 for NACA 65.012
S = 0.04 = area of foil
D = additional transverse foil drag

D = ½ r V2 S(CDI + CDP )

D = 1025 2.872 ´ 0.04 ´ 0.004 / 2 = 0.675 Newtons

Rudder Details

AR = 12
S = 0.1021
Section = NACA 0012

9 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

D = ½ R V2 S ( CDP + fI CDI ) + 0.675

Table 6.7

Actual values of lift and drag for a design 2 rudder with foils at 5 knots.

a CDP fI CDI fL CL D L
Newtons Newtons

0 0.0058 0 0 3.2 0

2 0.006 8.143´ 10-4 0.1833 3.6 79

4 0.0066 3.257´ 10-3 0.3666 4.9 158

6 0.008 7.328´ 10-3 0.5499 7.3 237

8 0.0095 0.01303 0.7332 11.4 316

10 0.011 0.02035 0.9165 14.2 395

Design 2

(with no foil)
Section = NACA 0012
S = 0.1021 m2
AR = 0.6862/ 0.1021 = 9.22

CL = 1.3 a / [ 12 ´ ( 1 + 2 / 9.22 )] = 0.08902 a

CDI = CL2 / ( p ´ 9.22 ) = 2.736´ 10-4 a 2

Table 6.8

Actual values of lift and drag for a design 2 rudder without foils at 5 knots.

a CDP fI CDI fL CL D L
Newtons Newtons

0 0.0058 0 0 2.5 0

2 0.006 9.740´ 10-4 0.1757 3 76

4 0.0066 3.896´ 10-3 0.3515 4.5 151

6 0.008 8.766´ 10-3 0.5272 7.2 227

8 0.0095 0.01558 0.7029 10.8 303

10 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM
Rudder Design file:///D:/ngenet/naw/rudderdesign.htm

10 0.011 0.02435 0.8786 15.2 379

A graph comparing the calculated data above is shown in figure 6.5.

The tip of the foil will have to be slightly modified to accommodate the transverse foil. The section may also
have to be increased in thickness by using a NACA 0015 section at the very tip. This will make the tip
stronger and the foil less likely to break off.

11 of 11 5/26/2009 7:25 AM