At my age, I told myself that was the time to rewind the reel of my life.
I wrote two books, one retracing my life since born and a second one dedicated to my passion of ever the “Sailing Boats”
Fortunately, I met the real Sailing Boats and later the World of Sailing Models.
Directly published on the Web via Model’s Forums First Edition – December 2019 Model’s INDEX 0) <) " ] | a6 (<>, ” 3 Esterel-450 eee 12 Metres ec eee cece cc cceccceeeceeeeecteeeeeaees ” 27 eeeeeecccccccessceccccesssecccceeeeeecceeeeuaeeeceeeeaunees ” 50 J C]aSS 15 Metres (Tuiga) oo. eee eeees ” Muini-Freccia (Guinness) FOOTY cece cece ence ceeeaeeeeeenneees ” 4 93 ……… cece c eee e ee eee ” 160 cece cteeee eee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeneeeeees ” 183 “Claudio Gadget” eece cece cece eee e cece cece ee eees ” 232 cece cece eee eeeeeceeeeeeaaaeuees ” 243 Out Of Bin kee eee ce eee c cece eeeeeeeaeees ” 262 Addendum — nn eee ccc cece ccc ceeecceeeaeeeceenneees ” 296 cece eee ccceeeeeeeee cece cece eee eees ” 328 Stained-g]lasS “T1O0cm” design oo. Esterel 45″ New Design. No Rules apply yet. LOA 45″ 1150mm LWL 1080mm Beam 170mm Wbeam 160mm DSPL 3850 g The American Model Yacht Association AMYA has some 36 registered Models Classes. IRSA has only fewer registered as: Class A, 10Tater, Marblehead, IOM, and RG65. Other Classes are registered in other Countries as the DF95. According to my short research, some ~40 RC Models are available on the market. The ones sitting between 37″ and 45″ of length are about 11 different types. In the American market there is only one model with 45″ of length this is the Star developed in 1960. Personally, I found the [OM Rules obsolete in term of technological progress. When discussing the matter, thousand of justifications are given. For instance, why the carbon fiber is accepted for the Fin and Rudder and not for the Booms or Mast or for the Hull lamination? Matter of costs? According to the supplier: https://shop 1 .r-g.de/en/list/Fibre-reinforcements/Glass-fibre the difference in costs between a Glass tissue of 80g/m? and the one in Carbon of 93¢/m? is only 32€. Actually the price of a complete IOM ready for sailing is about 3000 – 3200 $. The use of Carbon tissue would be equivalent to 1% of the total ! Since many models including low cost Toys can be bought for 1/10 of the IOM price, why a new model then? In the last 5 or 7 years the Electronics made quite a big progress by reducing the weights. At 2005, the Weight Budget of my Models was sitting around 320g. 5 Five years later, in 2010, the same elements like Batteries and servos where around 240g, today in 2019 the same budget is close to 150g. Not only, but the servos are also offering better performances. I’m of the opinion that searching, here and there, it is possible to make weight economies, after all, is one of the “guiding rules” of the modeler when building something. Strong yes, but just what it is needed! The sailing model is not supposed to resist to a crash against a concrete wall… I’m also of the opinion that, all parameters being the same, the lighter boat will be the faster. The sailing shall be visible from 100 yards distance in order to control it, but still loadable in the car trunk. With the experience gained with the AC120 as well with the AC100, I have found out that these models can perform very well with Sail Surfaces above the average for models of that size. One of the reasons may be due to the Mast height that is generally shorter, hence the CE position, but also the sail shapes. Having widely considered all aspects, I decided to draw a new RC Model independently of any established Rules. This experimental model it is called: Esterel 45″‘ The table below refers to specifications of few models in the dimensions indicated including a new design. |ID{SOaWly 0|SE9ZLzUWD 0|OSzLUd |O0Z9LU «x|OT91ZWDLUwsx|—0OSZ/8LzUt |O0E82WLDU SP4WHD0j3edgAqyAoO|IleOd8p/¢pW|o7u€wLy6zUD!JgP/7SQLvwUs$’ZNTr3BFosY|l4XBi,japY-aQ9nydX|COOc9lZoPL!5xUII]D6ZMA0L6NS€Upw Id 9%Zr6 18 o0¥© Sal4 sr5uj|Boge ws/O%Zel | w>/6 2! ou wo/67301 |we/bxze |wo/Bx9rl [VaInaxUg WJSOULlIM4TA * 1pBOWS=uaeljIofsN]Ydxq,s|S0z9ODa4W/~EoiUZ-ejnp2°NydM*AJBHlLYIu@g} aE |ud0OLWrlZUo/-98w) TSIOVLYA IEeK Because of the new Battery technology and Servos progress from Analog to Digital technique, the construction is one of the parameters where the major gain it is expected. The Overall Ratio table is showing that the Bulb weight could be close to 70% against the IOM with 60%, and Sail Area/DspIl ratio of 1.81 against the [OM with 1.55. Under these conditions, it is expected that the Esterel 45” could use more sail area. O$1.! . Ww 64r0—-1 ©021 sai TSI Oe in (+ s — . LS]7 Zuo «SON SE COR PRS OES AP BS OM HL 5s | – 0& 4OSEbocOsPe=70IXL’BES£9%Dd( Lotr(@g0i7py.I,q | } | yJoO|wMes‘Id=E2rW9cSu1p|zt cas WLU SS, = beg, Sb —— tor YuTHSYLV O|WSLT { (|‘WBO8=d9ug0 About Rig Sails design approach for Esterel 45. From books, the aspect ratio is the paramount parameter to increase sail efficiency and VMG performances. Higher is, better is, but! The high aspect ratio does produce also a higher CE point that will reduce the lateral stability. As usual a compromise is needed! The Jib luff is generally dimensioned to the 8/10 of the Main luff. I would consider a 7/8 for Esterel 45. Just to quantify this point: the nominal Rig 1 Main luff is ~1600mm With the 8/10 option, the Jib luff will be : 1600 x 0.8 = 1280mm With the 7/8 option, the Jib luff will be : 1600/8 x 7 = 1400mm It is expected a better performance with the 7/8 Jib. The mast shall be tailored as consequence. The CE position is considered too. About the surface ratio between Main and Jib, the following considerations are taken: e The Jib is providing most of the sail power. e The Jib, out of the two sails, do not suffer mast turbulences because working on “clean air’ and because of that there is the interest to increase the surface as much as possible compared with the Main. e The Jib surface percentage will vary from 30% to 45% of Main surface e Genoa is not considered. e The Jib leech will be as close as possible to the mast and probably with a small roach. e [will keep the Jib as close as possible to the deck with the Radial boom. PJ2IUNS0AMld zPIUW0CDETZ DX=AS4ZT T0XEP’67IS = NIT’S@ 1-Z(S/YUlTy°9z) M|/NDOUu]Lag a ©!F|AJDOId Wil NIT’SZ ey 4, te O; f S o 6|2€0’1 lzSaUdspye$/ |9XDOSA1Z PeaonhiuN, SCJVOX=ITNo1F , cS | BOlMI S2z eat rsd /9OLJMBE7ZT= FjO=6/408Z9i’ =JB1X4/60°9ZAcgWjxw=aLoBeys OAIBSJ8Mdg WOBI0Z – AO UWNIDOA;G LOe=/iSC¢ 0SivO=2X6E7 This is an example of the use of the Savox 1250 Servo. The calculations are for a wind force of 12kt and the pull force required is 13.83 kg/cm while the Servo is offering a 20kgcm. A recent winch servo model like the Turnigy TGY 6114MD could be considered too. 10 LASPE £2UoOoe |GesOh4SF 0621 6SZ |eSo.42/OUWsginpeb=al |7£67=’}ao=juannsiypAuFsID}eGp-G ](I-gNuGyU)}!Ww1 Sew == S A} UDYJ JOEJ2 Y |XSAC0TV6OZWt=MIFE PSOMELbGB=Ir—DX =/19GNOxL8i’7SM°n6g05 els 3BJU1IN0W7OS5/!Y EOMI*9SX= Ipinouseg} | puards D(SIWOE9b) MISO=ADg Apzwe5=latdUsYHzDueOi=Swl!y Yw9Pa1n=DyN6e0o> ose SZUOP= Fe o0E tttttt Bauyesongd GNIAA This diagram, representing t he Stat ic rightiing moment, is re latively pessimistic since rea 1 wind directi10n 11 ont he Sails is not inc luded. |: —xi 7 Se 134N05SGfFw-uy wdeg Of} wu wubregq9m, u0U8o°rp7d1g O6CE07«GNl9SRIW)PYAe -7 Gol \ ev ell 12 ging | ST “ 13 5 o00€ LULU ZO, = LUIDAAA Wloog af {DID Gn carbon square tubes 8x8mm carbon square tubes 6x6mm ru M oad oC fT ~\\ | ee eee —— EE t : oO_— fas v1 fairlead _ = fairlead ‘) el ring | Se Close view servo setting Main sheet not illustrated es — ae | | ESTEREL 4S Ps BN | a | ii es Pa WEE KE 100 — Optional Jib trimmer 3TM servo Scale 1:1 lin A SSS 14 | Construction For Hull Master I used the extruded polystyrene foam. The plywood shadows are used as guides for the Hotwire cut. AA 15 Assembled Hull with epoxy bond followed by sanding with 100 grid 16 The assembled Master Hull is covered with GlassEpoxy to increase surface strength 17 —— S JOKE} ad e Bdis}unjoe L 18 Hull covered with packing tape to avoid resin adhesion during Hull lamination The Esterel 45 Hull exhibit a surface of 33.5dm72. Option 1 To use for the hull 3 layers of Glass Tissue: 0.8¢/dm? x 3 x 2 (for resin) x 33.5 dm? = 160.8¢ Option 2 To use 2 layers of Glass tissue and 1 layer of 63g/m? Kevlar (0.8+0.8+0.63) x 2 x 33.5 = 149.4¢ Option 3 To use 93g/m? Carbon tissue and 63g/m? Kevlar tissue to compensate the fragility of polymerized carbon fiber against shocks In sequence: (0.93+0.63+0.93) x 2 x 33.5 = 166.82 Thus the bare hull weight is between 150g and 170 g Deck Deck surface is 11.6 dm? Two layers of Glass fiber of 80g/m?: 0.8x2x2x11.6 = 37.1g¢ Deck assembly requires wood stripes along the deck sheer line. By practice, obeche strings of 3x5mm + epoxy resin will weight about 25¢. The “closed” hull will weight less than 235g 19 In order to complete the hull it will be added the weights for the Fin Box, Rudder Trunk and Servo supports as well the radial jib anchoring and various hardware. 20 /6O7L01 p46eou0sny| DO4l, %LTL yoaq Or |ZLUP9′ AXS|LU+OZuBHNI-gnYDi/ ‘sUDOugiaIoSNdnlbS‘0sAIPpMOHNGaUL9’Bo|Jg {s‘IBOSgedDbo0z=Upiu-WrNHa The total expected Esterel 45 weight is 3850¢ at the buoy ! The weight of the Fin is not fully established; hope to find a solution to reduce it further. 40 ak; L 50 4 Full Carbon assembly with square carbon tubes 4x4x3.1 mm flex resistance +2×0.5mm skin W = (H*-h*) / 6H (5x5x5x5 – 3.1×3.1×3.1×3.1) / 6×5 || NS 5 —, (625 – 92.3) /30 = 19.3x 2 =35.51 (625 – 92.3) /30 = 17.7x 3 4 53.10 treaded Brass rod carbon sheets | . a Fin Trailing Edge 800 aluminum sheet 0.4mm we cM 140 4x4mm 0.5mm carbon sheet square carbon tubes 21 Hb Peg th Es, 22 Hf Nesey st a8, 40g gained _ _with sanding — About the Fin construction the work is not completed yet. Up to now the specified weight and rigidity are not yet achieved, further experimental work is needed. No vacuum or sophisticated tooling used so far. Most of the modelers, including myself, do not have the equipments for. 23 Rig According to previous experience the Rig weight is very close to the one used for the AC120 being about 280g. | 160 mm = } 195 O° tilt :2 | 78dm? } 17798cr?) 1312 {Luft 80% ae ft) ‘ An 10mm 1275 305 i750 iL 2 Q w > _ co. s Re w CE ¥ 365 32 — MAIN 5098 cm? (34.6%) 1920 ea OO O 955 ) 510 398 450 /—— 415 bs 1 1708 Sis 24 W Cost budget (estimated) 3 QO’O&V 300°02 = =s,Wa;p3e0Pn—jog/°ulZBi|y€_=sa,jnuw/ydiBpoOleL| dAVC20XoW=G’rj-LeSuZ93°H pe a -dapPny-Ul4 ‘SsPDOIJANQadLUgh |OsISp-DONYG(uoHUxe) SSZOHS-XOADS AlPL 0g JOPAINYS XY 25 SPOUES spoue Bix syund suiodns MPSJIOY Mast & Booms composition Carbon tube of 12mm weight 46¢/m Carbon tube of 10mm weight 38¢/m Carbon tube of 6mm weight 23¢/m Note The ESTEREL 45″ Model is still under construction, delay caused by health problems. The Fin weight and rigidity still need a solution, although some weights margins are available. Wood core solution is probably too heavy. 26 12 Metre Class After a long tread of 23 pages on the RCSailing.net Forum I publish here only two models : http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/showthread.php?6900-J-Classversus-12Metre-Class/page 15 &highlight=class+metres 1. American Eagle 2. Columbia 1958 27 In 2013 I have proposed to combine the last class and 12 meter class to create a series of models having the same length. The most suitable scale was 1:17. In the: One of the sources for plans was the F. Chevalier “America Cup Encyclopedia” bought some years before. The first model I redraw for the purpose was the American Eagle. What was significant in that choice was the Eagle. ”- 6h – f ’ =, 28 ; | g‘m_dwy9/5ouitaLOSEAtorBYveZ’s§86—l2NchHc=— The Curve of Areas shows a prismatic Coefficient of 0.54 cmpared to = © ao) voAe—l Es2 ww Swe 02w Ew9| og66 o6ve ging WdSG vqsuo9 VS vor IMI wesg Yesg €e-&—8 auejdi6wyg |aZyLeo:s 1SEe & vie 83s |PaYSUDIBWG VS6L 42 aug jSUaDIpoByWP qesG vO? WwW weag 1dSG vs 3] Sail Plan of 6150 cm/2 American Eagle scale 1:17 1415 SAIL PLAN 32 The Construction The Master is made with the typical Foam material as the Extruded Polystyrene 33 Hot wire table hot wire 3D view horizontal cut 90° square vertical cut To cut the Foam Blocs I did built a 2 Hotwire cutters, one for rectagular panel and one for curved shape 34 Two examples of cuttings. 35 36 37 ‘comon) i) fh, © SC= SiS— oD)t— —_iS i io) a) ne) > Al 39 - coa ting Hull Coated with 2 Epoxy-Glass layers 40 The Hull is covered with Packing Tape as done all the times. In this case a little problem arise due to lack of adhesion in the concave corner 41 ieee, 26 ae) oy =eKvsemooae © © Sam — 42 The white paint is used as a “spy” to control the surface status during sanding. Ready for Hull Moulding ~~ | Sf e sangihng ib . » 43 – wid6S BEG WPolZOT ]IYDpMaeiSTyadgsuuLowl2Uos9Zz6′-EIp uM1idn1SQo9e”GPg0E-zs8%s2Sw6i @351 elLSOW ?y©oe,i |es If zZe9oIt 44 vO/woeulL wSeGaLg2 hqaupnnyg Columbia 1958 Columbia 12 metre Class was made in 1958. COLUMBIA 1958 Original data LOA 21.24m LWL 13.97 m Beam 3.60 m Draugh SA DSPL 2.70m 170 mm? 26.2T 3 scale 1:17.7 bales 3950 cm? 1860cm? 32% 927 i“ Scaled to LOA of 120cm and SA of 5810cm? 45 NT ) 4 r| Scorn i = = te AZZURRA 1983 scale 1:17 SA 5610 cm? y~/ al Lf f L Deck layout O¢T V7AIA IVaunZV 49 SUOIWLAdp J Class I have drawn years ago the Plans for a couple of J Class. The first was the Enterprise that I built and the second, the Endeavour, I made only the Plans. 1. Enterprise 2. Endeavour 3. Ranger 50 ENTERPRISE The presentation of the Enterprise RC Model will be a sort of “Build Log” L— se z+ AV, =r N . eST ror— 0g ogelcé Ere CeE.. SHEUL OLUZ8 SWLPS © E=SIuO, OYDfLp8 yOoG DIA86 F, PSYIPOUS 4 11SOLON BOO6E SDilOd$ 51 b TM- Agolpng|> scaled Sail Plan at 90% = 8130 crm? 1660 1000) os ys LLSb E = 13000m? \@, 3 1160c. 5575cm? 725 25″ Oo SB a L 405 Enterprise 1930 scale 1/28 1315 52 —s 12] 118 See 200 ee £ f 7 7 + 7 i f- eae Z IZ \\ | / ENTERPRISE 1930 | A DSPL 6167g {CT scale 1: 28 By ClaudioD Shadows on 5mm Plywood ready for cutout 53 82 a 7. Z — 60 L Mounting Table i 1 Shadows in place 54 _ ie al unt 55 Hull Master completed Hull Shadows cut-out 58 Hull coated before wet sanding 2 O as ~~ = O < > 40) ee ©. Y) 59 60 Before cutting glass fibre tissue a template is made with Newspaper Half Hull laminated 63 ea Oo > x ‘4 7 7 } ei Zi MS Oy x aioe an ie S. a 6 5 4 48.87 x 8.09 = 395cm3 x 10.5 = 4147g 3 Curve of Areas — COA and Ballast 87 Ballast Endeavour Keel Options JPUlWoNIH ZE6L a|QeAOWl+ SNOILd YINOAV]G |aPduIeWOyNs 88 pe!ts7San8,—idBoyVAIN aS@lnANEL 1dSQ 9TSUO| we!doinfl 296 7“Se rjdoaq T%/’LUES08 NeHeidiWISeP S eBLGEwueXxSOiaT= re-”lOudeag=aw0¢5ozs\ pailJfi aiW[yPjaoqydjJgeOqL|TSUOyTIzrtLswWw6\3i”l9—boet=r~4me“1ZdoztSrsun|Dhp0wUBT8DOT68H—b0I}xva RANGER (basic drawing for LOA of 1270mm) L-4¢9 OLZT Zieatn¢ z4VUD0S59 89 a N 7 o t p yi w S08 | — D9ynoAe7 Deck layout YIONVY 8cT OLT 90 J Class —” a Ranger 1937 COA = scale 1:1 oi original shape + see DSPL 4673g LCB -3.4% PC en | 1467 52.63 90.97 112.95 115 115 165 116.16 96.08 =: 0.50 6133 28.56 7.10 ~ —— — 155 3S — £ 85 : 155 95 Tt as Z 70 = os a Z 50 Z Z é :~ 7 2 BS (LB 55 ad XN an Fa as 5 OTT Z ay ao 75 70 x – a -S4[% 55 45 x = 10 ss = cones HS q 30 x “a 5 35 SE Z 15 1d 8 7 580.58 x 8.05 = 4673 cm3 115 115 105 6 5 4 3 116.16 x 80.5 =9350 Shadows and Curve of Areas 91 2 PC 0.50 1 20 15 a a 0 Ranger sailing plan Ranger Video Ranger 1937 http://youtu.be/8pXP216X_jc Sail Plan 6590cm? \ ANS NAN N\ \/ QQ) 5161cm? 2400cm’ Vv —_ —_ —_ ~ _ _ GGG TL ff fe 1399 1481 4180cm? VM Rule si RANGER 1937 92 15 Metres JI TUIGA 1909 By William Fife Flagship of Monaco 93 Tuiga the 12Metres of William Fife was launched in 1909. Since some years is the Flagship of Monaco. Almost every year is participating, among several other events, to the “Regates Royales” in Cannes (Cote d’Azur — France): http://regatesroyales.com/en/ At the “Vieux Port” of Cannes and during the “Regates Royales” week, I met the person in charge of the Tuiga Yacht. I told him that I was interested to build a Model of the Tuiga and asked if was possible to have some drawings. The response was negative, according to my interlocutor; the Club has never seen any drawings, except the ones published by a French Magazine. I got the copy of the Magazine and found out that the drawings were not adapted to build a model, therefore I started to redraw them at the best I could. After a couple of months the detailed drawings were ready I passed a copy of the drawings to the Yacht Club representative while myself I started procuring the material for the construction. I’m thankful to Mr. Fontana and the YCM that allowed me to take the Tuiga pictures once in Cannes and Menton in 2007. In the following pages the words are replaced by pictures. Unfortunately, in 2014, the model work was stopped due to a surgical operation caused by a Hernia. The full model was offered for free to a modeler that promised to finish and launch it. Since, non feedback yet 94 In Cannes side to side with Tuiga 95 Pictures taken during the “‘Regates Royales” in 2004 96 Tuiga Main Boom symbol 97 Tuiga was not far away ! | , } \ \ i \ > , \ Vn| AAA Me close watching at the Regates Royales 98 My 1″ drawing e=—/J+|gzic- rISovb753£86O0L4aMts} crSA6tvZ8g9i(|HdIb:yE = wd ag HOaseetsZSS28}zuO50h ajeos|GL: yq—-bin6zAup y SLthu eEGures =9 OFOL wegsWOSE ho seG SOT so59£6DS§h w9a0eB/=1z’o6Hxg8d »a CS $70 99 Tuiga Sail Plan E E § BE Tuiga 1/15 PncLse 100 WU LtA~f/e7\WZM JELaATNKP S1WZoANs, ZAIN DsMBopIbuN| EA Tuiga Shadows scale 1:15 101 —p——+] $7 e 188 OS S0zI f ED oe o87 e; 9S1fa= | Fo Mg,qspOD7p + piede d’albero ray, 102 0c6l 6 17 N ie 2 close-loop Halyard circuits close-loop 103 UID:Jous UIDW.lindup y SOAI VOINL aMnerot juleOWys ajeiyrs fe Rig drawing the most time spending 104 105 ale 1:1 drawing by C. Diolaiti 1909 servicing ions in Black = DECK LAYOUT for dim dimens ions in Red = scale 1:15 In Menton ; yi 106 107 The Mast ! 108 Tuiga mast 109 j | | f la IL ! / ip } ; | it |i | The Stern 110 The Bow 111 Jibs simulation j j .4 a See i+ nee ere Vio: : Simulation offorward sails 112 ’ PU Nee ‘ . Ae oe : The propeller 113 Shadows in place 114 is cy —_ rm Tuiga and Studio 3 115 Classical strip planking 116 ra Tye 117 118 Keel & Ballast 122 PD fe) 7 123 | a, Ne – Preparing for female Mold construction 124 125 Two layers of Gel-Coat at half hour distance 126 Glass lamination with several layers of tissue of different weight LP 127 Mold almost complete missing removal of tissue excess 129 Separation of the two halves 130 The two halves are joined with the use of bolts 131 Integration of supports 132 Hull Epoxy-Glass lamination 133 Two hulls laminated one with Carbon Kevlar tissue and the second only with Glass tissue 134 Glass Hull 300g lighter! TOO 135 Rudder trunk with 8mm Carbon Tube pees ty ee, ee Model rudder 137 The real Tuiga Rudder real stock 138 Rudder link TO Servo 139 140 ar ee Ss ure << <> -—= ARR = Wass ~ —— SN— sw The Winch 141 The Shrouds 142 144 Main Boom Sheeting Double 145 131mm —— +—”\=5 — dee i | -S -= = | L 30 32/7 mm WP? 3mm 2U-9—l TUIGA 172mm 146 scale cockpl t 1:15 he original 147 The model 148 The Original & the Model % my model Tuiga hatch 149 65,4 h19 ont 1 ‘ oe –< - 19,0 18,0 h18 TUIGA Hatch scale 1:15 Each deck element was carefully measured 150 19 Ean 79 ice 30 | 6 Vl 9 83 TUIGA Roof 2 ech. 1:15 | 17 | | jamz +s 72mm 151 |h|gese s ote 152 — | 153 The Cleat parts 155 Pulley & Cleat samples 156 Fully functional Pulley 157 Pulley' drawings 158 The Tuiga Transom 159 Mini Freccia This model is the result of a bet between couples of forum members. One believed to make a RC sailing model of 30cm while my self I was of the opinion that could be done with half of that length. It was 2006 almost 2 years before the Footy homologation. At the end I was left alone to try ... Two years later "Mini-Freccia" was awarded with the Guinness World Record 160 Here below the Footy Model of 305mm and the Esterel of 152mm. Of course the scale factors are : Linear size as scale Surface Square of scale Volume Cube of the scale Nes 7 + = According to SA Scale Factors 1040cm? scale 1:2.138 5 DSPL SA 52.8g 236cm* 600 SA 220cm? 260g 200 mm 281 64 —1—.-¢—J 32. | 3! 455 Main 165cm? Jib 55cm? 510g Guinness Record 161 According to the previous view it can be observed that the model of 152mm length should have also 52.8 g for the Displacement and 236cm/? for the Sail Plan. Playing with the size of the model, the volume can be slightly increased by changing the Hull Draft or Width. The first thing I did was to find out what the market was offering in terms of Battery and Servos being the most critical elements to define the final displacement. It was not excluded to make my own servo. I can anticipate that, to avoid complications, I have chosen the Swing Rig with Jib surface of 25% of total area. Searching around I found a small servo called LS-3.0 that I could use for the Main. 162 LS 3ue modified The WES LS-3.0 modified 3.19 900g/cm 163 Another mini-servo the Cirrus 2.5 MICRO SERVO 164 120mA/h — 3.7Volts The choice was composed by the elements indicated in the picture below: The Elements Total weight / ry 16.55 ¢ Onboard electronics = 16.55¢g 165 | deck roller anchor servo point Channel! 1 : Boom control 60° rudder axis Channel 2 : Rudder control First drawing consisted in a design with LOA = 325mm The COA analysis showed a DSPL (Displacement) of 288cm3. Surely too large for the purpose! 166 It is evident that a model of 325mm length is not in line with the desired dimensions as indicated at page 2. —— pu _ 2) Eee eee 325mm basic block hull before smoothing 167 121 DSPL 288g The second trial was a replica of the first one but with shorter length down to 250mm [ | | | | 25,0 cm pT) § 2 mn b t i 1 457-+8.10+987+1052+9 75481145 944356414 = 61 Bicm’ x25 = [5dm3 (P5058 168 The Displacement went down to 154cm3, still too large! The third trial was a sort of reverse engineering method where I used a piece of Polystyrene block and shaped freely by hand as such to give a sort of hull form. The block was then cut in three sections in order to have an idea of the section shapes This block was 170mm long 15/05/2006 1st draft 169 Retraced/copied the section cut forms Following the retraced section I have shaped a new Hull of 170mm lenght 170 Rebuild of a new 170mm hull shape according to previous cut | 170 21 ee Sail Area 30x14/2= 210cm? calculated Hull DSPL 5S/cm3 Observing the Data it can be seen that the calculated Displacement is not far from the 52.8¢ (page 2) Summing up the weights of various elements needed, I have slightly shorten the length and increased the Hull Draft 171 V fe ln os 3 S 60 152 a Fd au sy ==< 7 ae ——_ -——-—_——_] oy) = oe] p———__ Rewteee ee | Zé a 40.26x1.52=6 1.20 cm3 hull displ. measured vol. appendix CP = 0.566 61 cm3 6cm3 mini-freccia 152 This drawing should represent the final design. In the following pages some images of the practical work done. 172 Master 4 | , ) " 152mm - mould The mold 173 JADEVER 02> T0GTR Oty Hull and Deck weight 10.8 g including wood stringers 174 Weight Volume Hull 10.80 g Rig 6.50 g Fin 5.00 g 2.2 cm3 Rudder 3.50 g 1.6 cm3 Bulb 28.00 g 2.5 cm3 Total 53.80 g 7.2g The Mini-Freccia total volume 7 ate e saiBaM er then P~.haQes4by2tk MAIN SPECIFICATION +Max Beam 65mm +2RC channels 177 178 , a f 1€ of the witness 179 180 CERTIFICATE The smallest radiocontrolled model sailing boat is 15.2 cm (5 in) long, 6.3 cm (2 in) wide and its hight including mast, keel and bulb is 38 cm (1 ft 2 in). It was build by Claudio Diolaiti in Nice, France and was tested and measured on 14 November 2007. GUINNESS WORLD RECORDS LTD nnn ne tree ete com The Record! 181 4 Mini 150mm StaySali |! ESTEREL Future development could make use of the Staysail configuration… 182 FOOTY The Rules are rather simple with the use of a Box https://footy.rcsailing.net/footyrules_2009.pdf After the satisfaction received from the “Mini-Freccia”, 1t was not my intention to start to get involved with another mini model. It happens that a friend of mine went asking to design a Footy for him, as was the case before with the IOM Class. I decided to play this game and drawn a Footy. 183 Let start with the basic plan where the max length shall be 305mm unless the box diagonal is used. 305 305 Box Rules D-Foot ESTERE ClaudioD The initial design for Footy Esterel uses the diagonal dimension as such that the hull length is 325mm instead of 305. I’m not sure that this option will pay, but is taken! As can be observed the transom is inclined, but in the next page the new drawing also show the reversed bow. In my mind this decision is taken in order to reduce the overall hull weight 184 iSake lie 1au31S3 yTSsNo0Hqr/ uBlSyT sSui0od¢n h}0 4-q rapny Bs i ‘ 1 e q Vu 8s = (-—\_| Se oa “4 a it es of xt “7 > ee ig Ave 5 hi o. ~ ca ‘ . : uf re er ER S. par) ef ay td – ne * if . \\ Hey tt – PCE : 28 ¢ Ay le weet . jyospng weet wee ae ie a oe . ‘ ‘ oret peettny “! . ; i” ‘ Od se \\ earth a Cafe =f as ? ‘ ‘ 7 e|tSdn tTLiy {|—1—- xsaoingy SOv 185 ele \ A ae WN “a No Bumpkin used. The rudder remain inside the Diagonal Box Fin length limited to 200mm unless large sail area is used. 186 ICG a“ LCB HHEHHH 4H} — a vo ei i moO, \ es NS Pot 66cm? “ fi fa \ — ara “ 00Z \ Provisory = nace 2 = I Sail Plan . asSsic = a = a 398m? 36% ca | 7 { [ 125 324 LH 3405 — ——_ box mules 187 all above water slices 49 — 4s Hip hie A Cut out from 5mm thick Plywood 188 Sl ices assembled 189 Preparing the Molding Box 190 aieee) Sha er SE Piece of carton used to match the hull contour and than covered with 2cm wide red adhesive ribbon 191 SN Half mold la mination : i 192 Half mold made and out of the jig 193 Preparation of 2” half mold starting with first Gelcoat layer and followed by a second layer. Surfaces are waxed before Gelcoat application -e-—8tayers-of 105g/m? A BN a ACU EF ‘halfml ie 194 3x 100g/m*% + 2 xA’e20: Me + 3x 280a/m2. Wait of!Hhfi be steh HitTY, F The two halves extracted from the Jig, but still closed each other. 195 A way to separated the two halves 196 It can be noticed that the two half molds will be retained with bolts for future lamination processes.. 197 Clean v 1eWw Of the dual mold 198 Both molds laminated with epoxy glass 199 Removing excess of polymerized glass and extraction with laminated glass blade. = O ie. O = O ¥ Y) O = © — N The two laminated hull halves 201 IKD-2 5020 05¢ Less than 40g .. 4 z |} o : £ ia fe] 2 a £ “” g a o 4 – = 202 mold meniscus bonding lamination charged resin meniscus — rion adhesive surface Another joining method for the two shells the molds will be used to joint the two halves by means of a charged epoxy meniscus. Sample test is made in order to measure the bonding strength 203 ta meniscus pull test | | | { 204 s Waxed acrylic glass plate used to depose the two halves for meniscus polymerization 205 Smearing along the edges the silica epoxy paste 206 ‘comon) i) —_ S © on) a) — > .) N SS—i.) Ou © N = ean © om ) ne) © cS —_on) i) a) 1@) —>> o 1@) Ou — ae) — iD) Inside wood reinforcements patches lamination 208 The two halves are ready for bonding a0 i 78 he ff f sae ty ¥.fs * is +e=o8 209 Epoxy-glass Hull out of the dual mold 210 First view from bottom of the two bonded halves 211 212 A\O04 6yi=<9:B, sanjuDesaWOS /VuvL Byg=641:° / 9SJaANFyyMOg Isjueio/ s By 16g added for wood reinforcements and bonding paste. 213 Le = 08 oO J) re) ie) ® See S hac SIC M 214 e. Hull cleaned Deck cut-out for access 215 Hull filled with water checking for leaks. Lead used inside to simulate the displacement weight of 525¢ water leak test condition 216 plywood 1 5mm Oo Q 73 9 = N= a R Ig constructlon Draw ing t he Rig Canopy opt10na 1 study 217 side view and rudder mount detail for / i | | if i/ Rig on wooden model 219 white under coat layers (i= fae = d peas: 220 221 Footy Esterel InS1 de 222 the Box Launch date unknown, but already sailing in East European Countries fy = Z uy 223 tie iy | ti AP The design adventure continued with the development of the Futynett. JNINIINS = gopney ) S$ | scotia isso oD OFL wT a ud | rol oS was 4 P al 224 |I9L0—¢ a|~oSL-aneErNs jePg SeT: VGdHOBElLeU|TZ4?WuAqwIia17s2CdLSU|OlfQokpPbeuy e ww [— nN 225 Li <2 — C- @ = J 226 SV 1070cm? DELTA RIG FOO wind forces \, Ka “a =| —s in tl C J —.{ - -—_—__ TA 227 . 90° e o average oa ~ i sf going Up In view of a Mold construction or direct Hull molding 228 650 SV 1380crm2 Futinett Sail Plan 229 305 mm 304 mm 24 mm 140 mm LWL Draft Beam 305 LOA, BALESTRON 0 — Lf Rev1 SERVO —- PUTINCTT Futynett layout 230 The first half mold The Footy Story is ending here ! 231 Claudio Gadget I do not wish to exchange points of view about Sails theories, but simply presenting a simple tool used ages ago to make sails. This tool was called "Claudio Gadget" in the States, but it is not my design, but rather a discovery made with Sail Models Club AMON sitting close to the city of Milan in Italy. I presented this "tool" for the first time with the "minicoque" a French forum in 2004. Was later collected by RCSailing.net Forum and another Modeler decided to write a paper on the subject, he is Eric Rosenbaum, to him I do address my Thanks. A series of pictures taken several years ago at the time of first presentation: 232 The Basic Tool . fixation screew flexible Al. bar basic tool of The Ruler 14 13 12 Ww mM “S mn Fb wa Fe |S Aa a DRAFT - CREUX 11 Oo WSL 01 GR APD ad) 02 a RG) O38 ed GD YD 04 dG O5 dT AD MY dG OS Gd O07 Da dG O8 PD O8 da dD 10 Multiplier factor / Facteur de multiplication 233 A 14 GE 12 Gd 13 Fm % an aaa - ba * > > rele. iret) —s) 7b? – – : ss 7. = sa)Wye pea yt curtain’s r 234 235 fixing 1st dual face adhesive 236 Fig.4 adhesive protection removal 237 Fig.5 238 ~ ® – « ‘ “ . % : , 4 . – Pei : yy YY t r e e . ‘ – ” Fok 4 AY iG) – . – hy — TO ERS | ee a 6a Sein ete ee ERG eae a a 3 . * 2nd dual face adhesive application 239 aeons e | | | we rlJunk(oh + N S xe) a anel 240 b ond _ / DRAFT Practical application ‘= 4) es ‘- 01 = = « ‘se es 02 ‘ee O03 ‘es ae OA ‘oa nea O05 – O68 – ‘= Q7 = ‘7 &- OB ‘== 4 O08 “eee 10 «4 ‘=a @& « 1141 Mulopber factor ‘= 12 ee 13 Fm % Example: Panel chord Draft wanted 260mm 9 % Multiplier 6.6% therefore (260/100) x 0.66 = 1.71mm wedge Each spacer shall have 1.7mm of thickness See pictures 6 and 8 242 Stained Glass Was the 1998 when, visiting an Antique Furniture Expo, in one corner of the large Stand someone was making a demonstration of Stained Glass. He was a Master also teaching the techniques. We went visiting his atelier and we decided to take lessons. We were some 12 people and the course went on for almost one an half year. Some one, at the end of the course, decided to open a shop for Stained Glass 243 Stained Glass is a composition of various pieces of Colored Glass and retained by lead stripes. Lead stripes called “cames” are often available with “H” and “U” shape of different dimensions to be compatibles with the Glass thickness. Myself, I decided to familiarize with the Tiffany glass technique. Each piece of glass is covered on the edge with a self-adhesive copper ribbon. Several pieces are then soldered together with tin-lead alloy and iron. A detail of one of my works: Once the work completed a patina is applied to darken the tin-lead solders. The full shade is in next page. 244 This is the final act of a work that may last several weeks. The shapes are obtained with wooden forms previously made. My technique consists in superposing several plywood circular shapes. The shapes are of course bonded with adhesive. Holloow spherical shape The final shape is a matter of rasping and sand papers. 246 All the shades are of my personal design 247 Harlequin lamp My first Tiffany Lamp 248 Two views of the same lamp 249 Details of the shade of 80cm of diameter next page 250 Water Lily shade 50cm diameter 252 Drawing the lamp foot oo ps 69 a.a = feel + femeell OS ee el) 2 5S ell 0 Peel © 1 Beet 8S EE EE __ ae 50 —] “+ 36 359 934, 33 40 0 39 ee 38 I 41 | > a 32 w 31 oO 2 37 cs ft p—f 2> ee Wel ee ee ee CO eo 29 27 2 2 26 59 is & 25 24 23 26 21 x is 20 is i om 16 15 14 7 aap 2 2> . 3 253 . 15 –< 7 1l 5 5 2 6 The Peacock Lamp 254 255 Suspended to the ceiling eee Spee (Aa IN 4 A IN\\\\\ : \ s Ye SEwro & VL TE KT lk ij 7 256 Suspended to the ceiling 257 oat Stainglass for|Dra Some artistic drawings about Dragon Artistic interpretation of racing Dragons TUIGA 260 Out of the Bin I like archery; years ago I was member of a Club close to Toulouse. 5 years of Competitions from 1984 to 1989 until the work permitted. a ae yayee se" % , AS x ~" a -~ +4 ee : | , ; qt oe on Py : Bw 8 2 263 .-* . =i pind i ie a Cony ee : Vai . ; My Bow design of 1984 Side view \ Front view 264 Finally the Company that has made the above prototype abandoned the production since for them was not economically interesting. Today, after 35 years, 50% of bows use central window! 265 Another game! deovnwyo sOL/-B9S 266 Just for Fun 267 Ain 268 Hot Wire Cutter stabilizing weights metallic +~~ guide metallic vide | All corners at 90° 269 SSO - Sail Setting Optimizer SSO Basic principle linear bearings Construction underway 270 Linear bearing 271 OSS JO@oDfuS ceo Bupa *g |!04 OSZ OAUsDe Osh S| 4 272 ballast 273 SSO Sail Setting Optimizer dynamometiic principle concept application by ClaudioD Not to Scale 274 SSO principle er blowers imiz Sail Setting Opty 275 y _~ 276 Mahogany Strip planking Hull “Class M Studio: 1 277 Full carbon RADIAL boom Hinge 278 previous design 279 Radial Boom design +- + ospol6 6Juod B4SIu0ty]s |Q |Os0d OfOIF ADIS j6SoBusd YuOlE]p 280 Prototype future Radial Boom 281 From my Friend Pierre Tensioner Prototype 282 |Je} WOISUaJO}S PID|puke INO] lea 283 adA} ajqeo se 215 DIY »! 1 _ |OO009DLzUU5x|iO~OT09L1ZZsWLBUDx=||QOi~O/0S8sLZUW6D O|OZE1L8~2©LUwinx SHApyJOOqAIL|OIJPLd9€WWE6ZDgP/00S1zD5QVOYSEBsjapoOOzlo]Wsr5IL|6ZM|A06NeU€D‘PW TSIOVLYA WJSxOULlIA4] I have compiled a table containing the major parameters of some RC Sailing Models |S9TuoBe%d6510lsaZigqrwy Uj$OBoxDlp’e4uYZyW [,s|SO2a9iJn~byDZI-TpWNo’j4ed*AUMBEH@LYg] 307 HEI Design approach Under this Sky most of the time one should look around a see what exist already and what can be done. The AMYA expose in the boat list with 39.37″ (1O00mm) two models: the ODOM weighting 3.34, the Sea Wind weighting 2.94kg and the IOM with 4.0K¢g Bantock sale IOM 2.4kg bulb for Modern sailing models are exploiting the full hull length to reach highest theoretical speed Vr =1.2. Practically a Vr of 0.8 will be the most probable and even less! Let thus assume a model of 1000m of length and a displacement at the buoy of around 3500g that is 500g less than for an IOM. Some few calculations based upon a provisory Budget. l0O00mm budget Hull 175 35dm? carbon tissue 2x93g/m? + epoxy + 50g/m? glass Deck 65 12.8dm? carbon tissue 2x93g/m? + epoxy +deck bonding Hull Reinf. 30 ] x 152g/m? carbon tissue + epoxy Servos 85 Turnigy Drum /Savox Arm + Savox-SH0255 Battery 70 4x]1.5V AA dry lithium 2000Ma Rx 12 Fin 150 Rudder Rig 30 260 Hitec Selfmade Selfmade Classic Trunks 30 Fin – Rudder – Struts 25 Fin – Jib Supports 50 carbon square tubes, etc Hardware 40 fairleads, pulleys, eyebolts,tumbuckles, etc. Total 10229 Rounded at 1050g Bulb 2550g Boat 3600g ratio 70.8% – 390g appendages = Min. Hull DSPL 3600g – 390 = 3210g 308 pSv“ios‘aa)etndn&eeS-)6PV=DUO—o—CuNoB©mEx(=Sw3|p}0fcPg.rsttNi!dl,:a)ec~k—DypFra,ln=wahendiendCAwmoSiSaCN.’se V—-UcOD>~!DDe))“oNml&F‘.—gdtwpvCc!*\=O|ieD)S3_srfroaynts =i+w$.e)asLseSmlQoD‘~C)O—vo4ONg“etp!di—T_5=SScrea‘h}ye~a=Dn)O>=_fEiFes,tMa©t!. ag ” oOeS CaAt “i:f&7“;iae,R D02) aLS2OsO=o oBSeB©aPA“i““eamn ZNSIxee=b O8oL6C2fv~naect BE-Np YQFOSosD&s3~fs moao2osony PoFne , igeoa4 By experience the wooden construction is excluded since the Hull will be too heavy probably in the order of 150g more, will be verified at the end of this analysis! The initial step will be to draw the “model sole” in other words the immersed volume. rafi37p*oAN‘=(en)y°?hg}l =oaetc.in—3rm, & id deen D) wae| 309 Once drawn the “immersed volume”, what will be added above the water plan will follow other criteria including the aesthetic aspects being the only visible part when the boat is in the water. From hydrodynamic point of view the round hull (arc of circle) will present the lowest Wet Area hence producing less friction. This principle shall be considered from the beginning, although the America Cup yachts seen in 2007 were rather different presenting hulls almost square, (see Alinghi, the winner). The reasons are unknown by the author, but probably due to a better course stability when the Hull lower edge is immersed at 25° 173 186 | T { | T ,a I Sy Se, > | Alinghi 2007 Esterel 45 LWL Wedge 310 of heel. L 100 overhang | 520 mm 1040 mm With the above examples, the top one has shorter Water length and small overhangs, the second the LWL is as long as the total length of 1000mm So we have chosen the max displacement of 3450¢ while the Prismatic Coefficient can be recover from the page 5. For an “all-round” model, the PC could be 0.57/0.58 Under this condition the Main shadow immersed surface Area can be calculated according to this formula: Main Area = DSPL — App / 0.57 x 100cm 3450 — 390 / 57 = 53.68 cm? or 3450 -— 390 / 58 = 52.75 cm? Remember that 1050g are employed for the Model construction As observed, with the higher PC the Main Surface is reduced since the volume will be spread along the hull extremes. 311 ae LWL immersed volume ee Red Line = Higher Prismatic Coefficient Checking the Section Surface Until now the boat beam was not mentioned as well the draught. The previous table at page 9 one could decide to use 175mm for the Deck beam and 45mm for the draught Let start with an Arc of Circle: still missing some cm2 Based upon Shadow n° 5 Max Beam 175mm Water Beam 1538 mm 7.46 cm? 7313: TM 6.76 ” 6.33 ° O00) ” 521 * 4.47 ” aal ~ Ls: “ 48.65cm? 312 equivalent missing J surface | At this point 3 options can be considered: 1. Increase the draught at 46.7mm. 2. Modify the Arc of Circle curvature. 3. Widen the Beam. e Increasing the draught is not a good solution since is the source of a deeper wave that add friction. e The Arc of Circle can be slightly modified. e Wider beam acceptable with lighter modification of Arc Of course a “square option” is not totally disregarded! Max Beam 175mm Water Beam 153 mm 6.33 5.80 5.21 4.47 3.51 1.98 ” ” ” ” ” ” \ i | Ee * Se ee 45 746cm? 7.13 ” 6.76 ” Si is Sas 48.65cn* That’s it Thanks to the Spline tool of CorelDraw Wanted 53.68cm and obtained 53.69cm2 313 Is not an Arc of Circle but still acceptable. 42mm is the draught of Shadow n°6. Note the difference of the perimeter lengths At this point we can draw the model plans with the following parameters: Hull length 1000mm Water plan length 990mm (elastomeric bumper excluded) Deck Plan wide 185mm Water plan wide 164mm Main draught 46mm : original are of circle i S6′ 185 mm J | l 1 \ Water Beam 165 mm 14cm? \ ne NS 7.56 ” f.17 ° 671 ” 607 * 5.24 “” 3.90 1.02 ” sa \ ‘ oN i. St ae “he. ~ /, j aeew fa 7% sow a \\b1c)gi Q. “ Se 53 67cnr Obviously on that basis some changes can occurs. The basic plan depicted next page with CorelDraw screenshot 314 Jo 4G ws e/h Waterplan spline CorelDraw 5 screen 16 18], , 20), , 22], , 241, , 26 30 32], , 34], , 36], , 38], , 40 46 48], 50), 52], ,54 60 62 64 66 68 76 78 80 FR | eSseanha Meo Bw 16:18 centimeters =18| x! 3 i 5 FE 4 é 1 | em ef Spite ars area hierar a J fs: EE uupeq jo %0Z Edit i File CorelDRAW! 5 i < by 2 a ' o 2 = Fe] ee a Pe) ia UG RARE S PBA BS AR ARN ARR RE RAR ES PADS R ARS AERRG RAN ADT AAROR DRA H DR RER RBSRO “ol TOololLgVOWSIT—“9UD-E|A 7ofBgdslpe w,e678 329 Wepon A|wVSiUnL/ag ZS91d°02UVPTgOib-B5 -F1fT NxiOdgSDcNAEG09—Pe yUDoIaCqM\ |O95F0 2U32 qing o rz8Luioys) T0UM8R16 /|WDbUeg WOIDSLgM HWOSG? [6E9Ud1Is€Dp‘0Ed6WaPyTeds6$Q “B4éYScUOlD895d°0ioTSal 2UIvPZs9-BS |RLO!L = 67601 peipng SU! [SPO SOM y8g = B59 =‘Bjuoregy x52y1 sBeponyg B50i¢gz “BMpo.0Hr pBuonsey!Sgoinrz4Ssou0vDe Beoce yim D pDeJuBOi)sp T1BdoS9$seW‘PGOUIN}D B1‘uiO0ow! ipstuydlo BYOHNuASUnD 4JPSOLUVD)y sJZIaAiDBunY 068 {1D Woo Ulpus XDOIATS XCADS ¥STOHS 86S eTotsPn USMDYIG |©] alt 330 Once the basic conditions are retained, it is necessary to check the feasibility where the Electronics are a major issue in particular the Servo choice and Battery to cope with the Weight Budget. A=26DX7S/T4 $60TpZX9’BL°E l ( o F O P O W | S N O L I G N O D WO T/6=’7JOIZ WD paunsljid zWIUY0COL9 Nrg=’0oz- —eoe SNOL YINDIVO ; mp AO aid! IM;NeOW}Ag —paesUuIOW|ILNdSDOJ acie J|‘OPeZp~Xauo0d Nv0>gc»9 348 O3IASH X9DOSAZ1 850, BIQD A /-€ce ee £Oev=/’0SZ I could not go any further without the Righting Moment verification. 332 This is not a perfect method although pessimistic, but sufficient to evaluate the Bulb needed versus the Wind Speed. In this analysis can be seen that the Bulb weight required for 9Kt of Wind and 6000cm2 of Sail Area will be 2.2kg while the actual bulb weight by design is 2.4 kg. The Heeling considered is 30°. TBJ.[1eMNOoUuI8Ysgy PJOLUASMG OXAGL0″*8/DSe]T9 MX8G0=SOLF X019GF6OS8=PEI’] Nq0/1i3=S8n6GM47g% (I$9210=)ty 7 621=IVAyisuep QIODFW-9T)= GTwgji=)- (eVWa=ySt)g zUI0 9 4 919 333 This concludes my RC Model design approach. I’m open to questions: Claudio36@orange.fr If no reply is because I do not have the answer or I’m dead ! CaudioD 334 335 – = ad ; lod 7 oe _— i” .
