Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Keith Hughes" wrote in message ... Hi Shaun, Ive been reading up a bit on pumps, but some of the math is beyond me. i do know that its possilb eo hook must pumps up either in series, or in parallel. in parallel you quite logically get a doubling of flow in gallons per hour or whatever, while in series you combine the 'heads' whatever that means. i think it means head pressure? Yep, head is pressure. Basically, you have one pound/sq.inch for each 27.68" of water column (height). i know a lot of the losses in small pumps are from pumping 'up'. That's kind of a misconception regarding 'head'. Pumping up, down, or horizontal, the flowrate is dependent on the total backpressure on the discharge line (but of course, 10' of vertical pipe does have more total backpressure than 10' of horizontal pipe - of the same size). most small pumps are rated by how high they can pump water, and the rating for flow goes down as the height increases. installed in a boat, i would try to keep the whole thing on the level with the shortest hose runs possible. on a beach cat, i would have a thru hull on the side of the hull with maybe 6 inches of hose going to the pump, then another foot of hose going to the outlet. Keeping the tubing runs as short as possible is certainly the right approach to reduce frictional losses. One problem with the inlet on the side of the hull (or any hull surface tangential to the water flow) is that you get Bernoulli effects as the boat speed increases, that tends to create a vacuum in the suction line (the same concept that makes paint sprayers - the kind that use air hoses - or end-of-hose garden sprayers work. The high speed stream across the diptube end creates suction to raise the paint/roundup into the discharge stream). i think youd have to start with two pumps in each hull, both running off a common larger diameter inlest, and through a Y joiner to a common outlet. this would give you some options. you could run the pumps in parallel, or in series. then you would have to experiement with various reductions in the outlet to see what the smallest diameter nozzle you could use without losing flow would be. this is probably how you would use 'gearing'. if you used too large of a diameter nozzle, you really wouldnt get any force at all. Don't confuse "velocity" with "Force". Just like with a garden hose where you have, say 80psig, you can pinch the end to get a higher velocity stream, but you get less flow (i.e. less mass). Since the force = mass x acceleration, the force however is the same (you only have 80psig to start with). The same is true for pumps, as you note above, when you create more backpressure (pinching the hose), the flowrate goes down. If you move 100gpm of water through the system, the force is the same whether the discharge is 1" or 3", only the velocity of the dischage changes. Remember, PSI is pounds per square inch (i.e. force per unit area), so the 1" discharge stream may be at 10 times the pressure of the 3" stream, but the 3" stream has 10 times the cross-sectional area of the 1" stream. Keith Hughes in the very simples sense though, if i had the same volume of water flowing through both a very large and a very small outlet, the speed would be much greater for the smaller outlet right? this seems like a way to achieve some sort of gearing to me, despite whatever losses are incurred from backpressure. runing pumps in series would allow you to have a smaller outlet and still maintain the same volume of flow right? While there would obviously be a sweet spot for any given pump, having more velocity at the outlet seems like it would probably result in more real world 'thrust'. I was reading a page by an RC boat builder who use a bilge pump for drive on his boat. he used a fishing scale to measure the trust produced by the boat, and found that making the nozzle on the outlet increased thust, but only to a certain point. Shaun |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Shaun,
in the very simples sense though, if i had the same volume of water flowing through both a very large and a very small outlet, the speed would be much greater for the smaller outlet right? The velocity (speed) of the water stream would be greater from the smaller outlet. The resulting force, however, would be the same since you're moving the same volume of water per unit time. this seems like a way to achieve some sort of gearing to me, despite whatever losses are incurred from backpressure. It's not a matter of backpressure, it's a matter of reaction mass. It is Newtons second law of motion, paraphrased; for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The 'little' stream puts a lot of force over a small area, whereas the 'big' stream puts a small amount of force over a big area. In each case, the "force/unit area x area" quantity (total Force) is the same. As long as the volume remains constant, every increase in velocity will be offset by a proportional decrease in the area over which it is applied. It's not a matter of the water stream "pushing" against the water behind the boat. Its just like how rocket thrusters work in a vacuum; you shoot out 10kg of gas at 10m/s over a 10 second period, and you'll get exactly that much "thrust" in the opposite direction. To be sure, there are lots of hydrodynamic losses and effects for the boat, but the basic properties of thrust are the same. runing pumps in series would allow you to have a smaller outlet and still maintain the same volume of flow right? The same volume as what, a single pump with larger outlet? If you mean use a second series pump to overcome all the frictional losses to maintain flowrate, sure...but you're now powering 2 pumps. The cost of the higher velocity, at the same volume, is all the additional power you burn up in the second pump. While there would obviously be a sweet spot for any given pump, having more velocity at the outlet seems like it would probably result in more real world 'thrust'. The higher the velocity *at a given volumetric flow rate* the higher the thrust. It's Newtons formula: F = m x a Where F = Force m = mass (proportional to the volumetric flow rate) a = acceleration (proportional to the velocity of the water leaving the pump versus velocity entering the pump) I was reading a page by an RC boat builder who use a bilge pump for drive on his boat. he used a fishing scale to measure the trust produced by the boat, and found that making the nozzle on the outlet increased thust, but only to a certain point. Yes, and that certain point is where the flowrate begins to decrease as a result of the additional head pressure caused by restricting the outlet. There are other issues that arise when the outlet is sufficiently large that it represents a significant percentage of the width of the boat, which you can do with an RC boat, that just don't arise in 'real' boat applications. Keith Hughes |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Keith Hughes" wrote in message ... snip this seems like a way to achieve some sort of gearing to me, despite whatever losses are incurred from backpressure. It's not a matter of backpressure, it's a matter of reaction mass. It is Newtons second law of motion, paraphrased; for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The 'little' stream puts a lot of force over a small area, whereas the 'big' stream puts a small amount of force over a big area. In each case, the "force/unit area x area" quantity (total Force) is the same. As long as the volume remains constant, every increase in velocity will be offset by a proportional decrease in the area over which it is applied. It's not a matter of the water stream "pushing" against the water behind the boat. Its just like how rocket thrusters work in a vacuum; you shoot out 10kg of gas at 10m/s over a 10 second period, and you'll get exactly that much "thrust" in the opposite direction. To be sure, there are lots of hydrodynamic losses and effects for the boat, but the basic properties of thrust are the same. If i understand what you're saying here, it sounds prettymuch counterintuitive. I may be mis-using some of the terms? let me give an example just to be sure that i understand what you're saying here, and bear in mind that of course the numbers im going to use are entirely made up in my head, so they'd be wrong.... lets say that you have two identical boats with the same pump on each one, running at whatever flow you like, say 5,000GPH. Boat A has a huge outlet... say 5 inches in diameter. for arguements sake, because i dont know how to calculate the speed of the water for that given outlet, lets say the speed of the water coming out the back is slow. i dont know how slow, but lets say it comes out at 3 knots. Now boat B has the same pump, but the outlet is so small, that even though its using the same pump, the water is coming out at a speed of 20 knots. what you're saying is that both boats because they have the same amount of energy put into them, and the same total force.... they'd go the same speed? is there no relationship between the speed the water comes out and the speed of the boat ie. it seems pretty obvious boat A could never go faster than 3 knots, so boat B would never go faster than 3 knots either? runing pumps in series would allow you to have a smaller outlet and still maintain the same volume of flow right? The same volume as what, a single pump with larger outlet? If you mean use a second series pump to overcome all the frictional losses to maintain flowrate, sure...but you're now powering 2 pumps. The cost of the higher velocity, at the same volume, is all the additional power you burn up in the second pump. sorry, i think i was just continuing on from something i was writing in a previous post... i was meaning to say iff you had two pumps in parallel as opposed to two pumps in series... two pumps in parallel would give you double the GPH flowing, but having two in series would allow you to have a higher velocity through a smaller outlet right? you can probably see where im going with this, but it really does hinge on the question i was just asking about the relationship between the speed of the flow and the speed of the boat.... if a higher flow speed allows a higher boat speed, then it would seem logical to me that you might get more boat speed by running two pumps in series as opposed to parallel because you could then have theoretically a much smaller outlet diameter than you could with parallel pumps, and therefore a higher speed of water being pumped.... you're probably feeling like you're banging your head against a wall here... but im sure ill get what you're saying pretty soon... all the math that you're giving me looks right, i think there may be just some basic concept that im misunderstanding? While there would obviously be a sweet spot for any given pump, having more velocity at the outlet seems like it would probably result in more real world 'thrust'. The higher the velocity *at a given volumetric flow rate* the higher the thrust. It's Newtons formula: F = m x a Where F = Force m = mass (proportional to the volumetric flow rate) a = acceleration (proportional to the velocity of the water leaving the pump versus velocity entering the pump) ok, wait i should have read this first and thought about it more.... so there is a direct relationship between water velocity and boat speed, if you can maintain the same volume of water flowing.... right? so the sweet spot would be just before the pump starts to be slowed by the backpressure? now this may be pure conjecture on all our behalfs, but assuming you could get double the pressure (which you probably cant) at the same flow rate by having pumps in series as opposed to parallel, and for the same current draw, which boat do you think would go faster, the boat with double the flow and half the speed, or the boat with double the speed and half the flow? the total numbers add up the same right, but wouldnt the boat with higher speed water jet go faster? Shaun snip Keith Hughes |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Shaun
snip If i understand what you're saying here, it sounds prettymuch counterintuitive. I may be mis-using some of the terms? let me give an example just to be sure that i understand what you're saying here, and bear in mind that of course the numbers im going to use are entirely made up in my head, so they'd be wrong.... It seems counterintuitive if you're thinking in terms of the discharge stream "pushing against the water". lets say that you have two identical boats with the same pump on each one, running at whatever flow you like, say 5,000GPH. Boat A has a huge outlet... say 5 inches in diameter. for arguements sake, because i dont know how to calculate the speed of the water for that given outlet, lets say the speed of the water coming out the back is slow. i dont know how slow, but lets say it comes out at 3 knots. Now boat B has the same pump, but the outlet is so small, that even though its using the same pump, the water is coming out at a speed of 20 knots. what you're saying is that both boats because they have the same amount of energy put into them, and the same total force.... they'd go the same speed? Yes, that is the case. It's no different than if you used your hands, and applied the same force to boat A, using only one finger, as you apply to boat B, using the whole palm of your hand. It would "seem" that you're pushing much harder with the finger than you have to with the hand, but you're really not. With the finger, you have to apply a much greater force *per unit of area* than with your palm (which has a much larger surface area). For example, if you apply 10 lbf/sq.in. to one square inch on Boat A, and 1 lbf/sq.in. to 10 square inches on Boat B, the total force applied to both is the same, and the resulting acceleration would be the same (assuming the same time interval of force application). is there no relationship between the speed the water comes out and the speed of the boat ie. it seems pretty obvious boat A could never go faster than 3 knots, It may seem obvious, but that is incorrect. The discharge water is being *accelerated* to 3 knots faster than the intake water. So there is a constant force being applied that is totally independent of boat speed. If there were no friction (and bow waves, etc.) the boat would continue to accelerate indefinitely (well...see below). This is for an axial system, where water comes in the bow, leaves the stern, the only practical way to do it. As I said earlier, if your intake isn't pointed forward, then you have Bernoulli effects, and you have pump cavitation problems that reduce the flowrate. In the axial configuration, the boat speed increases system efficiency by pressurizing the suction line and overcoming the intake line pressure drop. At some speed, you'll reach a point where the pump cannot maintain an acceleration of 3 knots (outlet vs inlet), and your thrust will drop from that point on. snip F = m x a Where F = Force m = mass (proportional to the volumetric flow rate) a = acceleration (proportional to the velocity of the water leaving the pump versus velocity entering the pump) ok, wait i should have read this first and thought about it more.... so there is a direct relationship between water velocity and boat speed, if you can maintain the same volume of water flowing.... right? Exactly. It takes more pressure (force per unit area) to get that higher velocity, so you have to do more work on the system (by the pump). That additional 'work' is then available in the form of thrust. so the sweet spot would be just before the pump starts to be slowed by the backpressure? Just before the discharge *volume* (mass flow techically) decreases. Keep in mind that shrinking the nozzle is not "free", since that creates higher pressure requirements, and thus higher load on the pump (i.e. more amp draw). now this may be pure conjecture on all our behalfs, but assuming you could get double the pressure (which you probably cant) at the same flow rate by having pumps in series as opposed to parallel, and for the same current draw, which boat do you think would go faster, the boat with double the flow and half the speed, or the boat with double the speed and half the flow? the total numbers add up the same right, but wouldnt the boat with higher speed water jet go faster? Nope, 'cause it's the accelerated mass of water that supplies the thrust, not the discharge water 'pushing against' anything. Does the boat you push with your finger (above) go faster than the one you push with your palm because your fingertip is applying so much more pressure (over a small area) than your palm is? No, if the total force applied is the same. It doesn't matter whether it's great force on a small area (fingertip, small water stream) or a lesser force over a greater area (palm, large water stream) if the total force is the same, the thrust is the same. Keith Hughes |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Keith Said:
.... Looking at the RULE site, their largest bilge pump is 8000gph, or 133gpm. That calculates to 7.8 Lbf thrust, with a 31 amp draw at 12VDC. Comparing that to a Minn Kota Endura 30, with 30 Lbf thrust, at 30A/12VDC gives a good comparison of the relative efficiencies. THAT makes a lot of sense, (a 3 or 4 to 1 ratio) and gives us some real-world numbers to think about... And the following implies that a decent experiment could be done by using a maximum-outlet-diameter smooth hose to the outlet, and then fitting different experimental nozzles: I was reading a page by an RC boat builder who use a bilge pump for drive on his boat. he used a fishing scale to measure the trust produced by the boat, and found that making the nozzle on the outlet increased thust, but only to a certain point. Yes, and that certain point is where the flowrate begins to decrease as a result of the additional head pressure caused by restricting the outlet. There are other issues that arise when the outlet is sufficiently large that it represents a significant percentage of the width of the boat, which you can do with an RC boat, that just don't arise in 'real' boat applications. Let me try an approximation based on the above, looking at at my idea of running a large? inboard pump connected to my existing marine engine thru an air-conditioning compressor clutch, and piping it thru a control valve to vary bow thrust port-to-starboard. 30 Amps at 12 V gave maybe 7 pounds thrust. That's about 1/2 horsepower. Say I can use 2 HP (What I understand a car air- conditioner uses) to a pump with the same losses as the example Keith showed. So maybe that's 28 pounds thrust. That sounds like plenty for a 25 foot boat... Question: How much thrust do typical electric bow-thrusters give in the smaller sizes?? (We'd expect them to be more efficient).. BTW, they are expected to be used at close-to-zero hull speed, so the thrust measurement is reasonable here. Maybe I can try some of this out this Summer on Lake Champlain (Vermont) . (Now I'm boatless :-( on the Med this year, but moving to the shore of the South China Sea for the next 2 or 3 years where I WILL Mess With Boats!). Interesting discussion! Regards, Terry King ...On The Mediterranean in Carthage |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jets (be they axial like real waterjets or centrifugal like a bilge
pump) are more efficient than larger diameter propellers ONLY when the boat is moving fast enough that the drag from propeller strut/shaft/and rudder becomes a significant part of the drag values. In the real world that works out to be around 25-30 knots. A bilge pump will never beat a small trolling motor propeller at displacement speeds. I've seen Cal 20's pushed by a big trolling motor for a sailing school. Works o.k. in calm water but in any sort of breeze it's not enough thrust. The Cal 20 with a 3.5 HP outboard was a LOT faster and would end up towing the ones with a trolling motor. For a Thunderbird, a typical 5-8 HP long shaft outboard is the only solution that makes sense. Evan Gatehouse |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Evan Gatehouse2" wrote in message ... Jets (be they axial like real waterjets or centrifugal like a bilge pump) are more efficient than larger diameter propellers ONLY when the boat is moving fast enough that the drag from propeller strut/shaft/and rudder becomes a significant part of the drag values. In the real world that works out to be around 25-30 knots. A bilge pump will never beat a small trolling motor propeller at displacement speeds. I've seen Cal 20's pushed by a big trolling motor for a sailing school. Works o.k. in calm water but in any sort of breeze it's not enough thrust. The Cal 20 with a 3.5 HP outboard was a LOT faster and would end up towing the ones with a trolling motor. For a Thunderbird, a typical 5-8 HP long shaft outboard is the only solution that makes sense. Evan Gatehouse hi Evan, there may have been some crossed wires here.... the bilge pump/trolling motor solution was for a 14 foot beach cat. Shaun |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats.building
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Keith Said:
OK, I'm confused. Are you talking about *just* a bow thruster operation? **Yes, ONLY Bowthruster, maybe also piped to SternThruster ?? Just for smooth docking/undocking or dead-slow movement in calm water.. I can and do bring my 22' Inboard CuddyCabin to shore / rock points with the canoe paddle. But having a fully-controllable couple of horsepower should allow total maneuverability. The marine engine would be in neutral, just running the pump... Question: How much thrust do typical electric bow-thrusters give in the smaller sizes?? (We'd expect them to be more efficient).. BTW, they are expected to be used at close-to-zero hull speed, so the thrust measurement is reasonable here. My understanding is that they are considerably more efficient than typical outboards, since the "ring" around the prop eliminates a significant amount of prop slip relative to having an open prop. Keith Hughes Right! Apparently this is a significant factor in dead-slow operations. There are huge (Kort Nozzles ?) on big tugboat propeller installations. Interesting idea... We've had some excellent information in several above posts. What I'm getting from all this is: - Inboard pumps to various outlet nozzles can be effective for maneuvering and very slow speeds. - Efficient forward-motion propulsion up to 3 or 4 knots is much more efficient using external propeller (such as 'trolling motor' types). My idea is a different one: I have conventional marine propulsion for running underway, but I wish I could have good fine-control maneuvering / docking / dead-slow sightseeing based on an inboard pump driven from my regular marine engine. Especially with a conventional fixed-propeller / rudder type boat that steers for c*** in reverse, and is very difficult to turn in a short radius, this would be "Nice". Regards, Terry King ...On The Mediterranean in Carthage |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Help with bilge pump installation | General | |||
Bilge Pump Upgrade | Boat Building | |||
Propane Sniffer Meltdown | Cruising | |||
Bilge Pump Switch | Cruising | |||
Bilge Pump Switch | Electronics |