![]() |
Prop Depth
Could anyone tell me or point me in the direction of info regarding how to determine the optimal & minimal operational depths for props? Warm Regards Shawn |
Prop Depth
Shawn:
The answer to that question depends on the application - type of propeller, power loading, operating speeds. Can you tell us a little more? Regards, Don Donald M. MacPherson VP Technical Director HydroComp, Inc. http://www.hydrocompinc.com tel (603)868-3344 fax (603)868-3366 "Shawn Gibbs" wrote in message ... Could anyone tell me or point me in the direction of info regarding how to determine the optimal & minimal operational depths for props? Warm Regards Shawn |
Prop Depth
Shawn Gibbs wrote:
Could anyone tell me or point me in the direction of info regarding how to determine the optimal & minimal operational depths for props? Warm Regards Shawn Thanks an interesting question. Submarines have been known to go fairly deep and the props kept working. Maximum down angle is usually determined by the engine specs, somewhere around 5 degrees, but then hover craft and helicopters have around 90 and their props work. You should try to maintain about 2 3/8 to 2 1/2 clearance from the hull. Other than that, most props will work to some extent. On the more serious side, David Gerr has written a good bit of information on props. Good Luck, Donald -- I'm building a Steel Robert's 434. You can sneak a peek if you wish by clicking on me link below. http://bellsouthpwp.net/d/o/donrayp/ 'USA, Home of the best politicians money can buy' |
Prop Depth
In article , "D MacPherson"
writes: The answer to that question depends on the application - type of propeller, power loading, operating speeds. Can you tell us a little more? I'm playing with the base design for a hydrofoiling semi-wing-in-surface-effect craft; electric, solar-electric, hybrid-electric; semi-kayak-ish main hull with proa-like outriggers. The motors (probably Minn Kota but haven't ruled out using more efficient motors used in electric vehicle competitions) will be located at the base of either V-type wave-piercing or T-type fully submerged foils, so part of my current task (and the basis for my admitedly vague/nebulous question) is to make sure that the props stay at a functional depth as the foils rise. Current design allows me to vary the depths of the foil-prop assemblies. I'll ask the question again after I've figured out how light I can safely make the frame/hull, how many batteries I can pack and still stay safely buoyant, which will finally lead me to foil, motor and prop choices. Warm Regards Shawn |
Prop Depth
Shawn,
Boy, you gadda set don n' figur o' What cher doin. A propellor will stay working until it aspirates (sucks air in from the surface). This is not a real big problem for trolling motors and not even a big issue to IC outboards until SHP gets up there (~50). Not to mention that you are trying to mix three completely different animals. Now, Are you investigating 1-Wing in ground effect, 2-surface piercing hydrfoil or 3-fully submerged foil with active control?? The motors of electric powered cars are not a lot of horsepower, but the starting torque is real good and that almost does not matter to the propellor. Electric machines tend to be "made out of heavy" and batteries won't help you out there either. I think you might think about this a little longer. Matt Colie An ex-engine professional, licensed marine engineer, naval architech and builder of very strange things Shawn Gibbs wrote: In article , "D MacPherson" writes: The answer to that question depends on the application - type of propeller, power loading, operating speeds. Can you tell us a little more? I'm playing with the base design for a hydrofoiling semi-wing-in-surface-effect craft; electric, solar-electric, hybrid-electric; semi-kayak-ish main hull with proa-like outriggers. The motors (probably Minn Kota but haven't ruled out using more efficient motors used in electric vehicle competitions) will be located at the base of either V-type wave-piercing or T-type fully submerged foils, so part of my current task (and the basis for my admitedly vague/nebulous question) is to make sure that the props stay at a functional depth as the foils rise. Current design allows me to vary the depths of the foil-prop assemblies. I'll ask the question again after I've figured out how light I can safely make the frame/hull, how many batteries I can pack and still stay safely buoyant, which will finally lead me to foil, motor and prop choices. Warm Regards Shawn |
Prop Depth
In article , matt colie
writes: Boy, you gadda set don n' figur o' What cher doin. Wish that were the first time I'd heard that! :) A propellor will stay working until it aspirates (sucks air in from the surface). This is not a real big problem for trolling motors and not even a big issue to IC outboards until SHP gets up there (~50). Not to mention that you are trying to mix three completely different animals. It gets worse. The design is a prelim to making it submersible. Now, Are you investigating 1-Wing in ground effect, 2-surface piercing hydrfoil or 3-fully submerged foil with active control?? Yes! This version is a hydrofoiler, probably surface-piercing for control simplicity's sake, using a WIG structure on the struts as an adjunct only. The wing-foils are inflatable (think closed-cell parafoil/parasail) and will use a foil profile incapable of actual lifting the craft from the water (true WIG) except under high wind velocities when the wing would be deflated. With the foils inflated, the craft will only be practical on fairly smooth water unless equipped with fully-submerged foils due to the changes in angle of attack that would result when it encountered a swell. The wingfoils are also intended to act as hydrobatic diving planes for the submersible when that time comes. The motors of electric powered cars are not a lot of horsepower, but the starting torque is real good and that almost does not matter to the propellor. Electric machines tend to be "made out of heavy" and batteries won't help you out there either. My goal is not a high top-end velocity, but one of efficient use of batteries .... eventually with the goal of reaching a dive site using the least amount of energy and without having to have a surface tender. In that respect, EV motors are a good choice in terms of weight and efficiency. For that matter, everything has to be considered in terms of weight. When it comes time to consider the final transition to submersible, I'll unquestionably have to convert to a hybrid electric due to a relatively substantial increase in weight (ballast and mixed-gas/rebreather tanks, etc.). I think you might think about this a little longer. Me thinks thou art being kind and tactful. I'm of the mind that I'm going to be thinking (and dynamic modelling and calculating and recalculating and ...) about this one for a *lot* longer! :) Truth be known, I'm still not completely convinced that it can be done as it's currently envisioned -- especially since, as you so poignantly pointed out, I'm melding several different technologies/principles not normally mated (and possibly for good reason). But, since I love designing for designing's sake, that's okay. Sometimes science is advanced as much from the mistakes/failures as it is by the successes. Although I very much prefer success, it's still just different sides of the same coin to me. Warm Regards Shawn |
Prop Depth
|
Prop Depth
It's funny how the ones that are resistant to change (or anything new) whine the loudest and longest ...I'm not *even* going to bring up the topic of traditional boat building versus 'composite' ...doh!!! I appreciate all kinds, and enjoy all kinds. Brian "Backyard Renegade" wrote in message om... OSPAM (Shawn Gibbs) wrote in message ... In article , matt colie writes: Boy, you gadda set don n' figur o' What cher doin. Wish that were the first time I'd heard that! :) SNIP Sometimes science is advanced as much from the mistakes/failures as it is by the successes. Although I very much prefer success, it's still just different sides of the same coin to me. Warm Regards Shawn Hey shawn, I think it is a great idea. Watch this forum for info on skin on foam construction. Very light, very strong. Also maybe consider a mast type appendage with the ability to generate power during dive time. Like a solar panel and a windmill? Maybe even put a couple of mirrors and tube in there and have a periscope?? Sounds like fun. I remember how much **** I took last year with a boat with negative rake and tumblehome shear, now there seem to be a bevy of boats coming from the larger designers with just this "look".. Don't let em' get you down, just keep buildin' it. Scotty from SmallBoats.com |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com