80 MPH 21 hydro

Intlwaters

Help Support Intlwaters:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
nitrocrazed said:
I would think the ground effect of the relatively wide tub would be more effective for stabilising the tub than neutral wings.
Ian.

68617[/snapback]


Anybody fly helicopters in here.. i know i did for years and ground effect has little to do with stabilizing anything.. Ron Jr you know what i mean. get a helicopter within the height of the rotor disk off the ground and all hell breaks loose.. Get an airplane in ground effect and you have to force it on the runway....

I have seen video of people designing ground effect objects and control is always a problem.

I think that if you are going to try to use ground effect to your advantage then going to the sponsons to get this is the best place.. the tub by its self as a roll center that is to narrow to control stability based on ground effect albeit it does produce it..

The more I think about this.. trying to control ground effect, the more I think staying away from it is best.. maybe take notes but not focus on it.

Some light reading: http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/ltrs/PDF/...99-cr209544.pdf

This is fun: http://www.aerodyn.org

Grim
 
Grimracer said:
nitrocrazed said:
I would think the ground effect of the relatively wide tub would be more effective for stabilising the tub than neutral wings.
Ian.

68617[/snapback]


Anybody fly helicopters in here.. i know i did for years and ground effect has little to do with stabilizing anything.. Ron Jr you know what i mean. get a helicopter within the height of the rotor disk off the ground and all hell breaks loose.. Get an airplane in ground effect and you have to force it on the runway....

I have seen video of people designing ground effect objects and control is always a problem.

I think that if you are going to try to use ground effect to your advantage then going to the sponsons to get this is the best place.. the tub by its self as a roll center that is to narrow to control stability based on ground effect albeit it does produce it..

The more I think about this.. trying to control ground effect, the more I think staying away from it is best.. maybe take notes but not focus on it.

Some light reading: http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/ltrs/PDF/...99-cr209544.pdf

This is fun: http://www.aerodyn.org

Grim

68632[/snapback]

While flying low level inverted backwards it gets real tough.
 
Well said ron. :D :D . it takes all the skill sets you have to do this and you have full control of pitch and roll...

We just dont have that kind of control in Boating

grim
 
I looked into the ground effect thing a while back and one of the key things I struck on was that the ground plane has to be flat to be consistent....... I haven't raced against other boats on flat water for a seriously long time!

The way I look at my oval racing these days is to go for consistency (consistently slow :lol: ) and relying on ground effects seems to go against that idea for me at the moment until I hear otherwise.

Where we are so far

It seems the current key issues in the whole higher speed oval racer debate are;

1. Hydrodynamic drag.

Pushing something thru water is harder than pushing something thru air.

Reducing running surfaces thru improved aerodynamics seems to be something the majority agree on.

2.Aerodynamic drag.

Reducing aero drag makes the boat less resistant to moving forward. Also within aero drag we need to establish how much lift the tub requires, and how to reliably control that lift.

Something that has not come up yet is non-trip surfaces and the effect they have on lift. My thoughts are that they are needed for cornering but they also are not the greatest for aero efficiency.

Tim.
 
TimD said:
I was toying with the idea of some type of  neutral wing at the back of the hull for the purpose of acting as a stabiliser if the front of the boat went above horizontal. Something like making the top skin of the tub wider than the tub sides (and thicker than the top skin obviously). Anyone tried this? Ron Jr?
68599[/snapback]

I've played with winglets on my hydros (like Andy's SG's) for 5 years now and they can have quite an effect on hull stability. When I decided to put rear sponsons back on the boats for heat racing I made them with the tops flat and extended the sheeting to form a wing area, best of both worlds. :rolleyes:

Here's a neat little program if you want to figure out how much lift (or downforce) a wing section will make...

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/foil2.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Any chance of a pic of the rear sponsons Terry?

Also, did you find with your testing that the wing section had to be a particular size?

Tim.
 
TimD said:
Any chance of a pic of the rear sponsons Terry?Also, did you find with your testing that the wing section had to be a particular size?

Tim.

68708[/snapback]


Here's a couple of shots, sorry for the poor quality but I think you get the idea.

I only made one set of wiglets for each hull, similar to the size Andy uses. I did make them removable and put them on at different engles with body molding tape.
 
Thanks Terry,

You seem to be running some angle to them from the pic's - is that the case or are they neutral?

Tim.
 
TimD said:
Something that has not come up yet is non-trip surfaces and the effect they have on lift. My thoughts are that they are needed for cornering but they also are not the greatest for aero efficiency.
Tim.

68682[/snapback]

Tim

Non Trips (up front) are not needed for anything if the turn fin is correct. The non trips and lack of them in the tests i have done have almost as many negitave effects as positive.. I have built a number of sponsons without non trips and there is a good chance that they will disapear on my boat designs in the future.

You never know.. i will say this.. i had a vision the other day and i have seen the future of sponson design.. GOOD LUCK TO THE REST OF YOU....kidding :p ..or am I :ph34r: ....... :D :D :D ;) hehehehe

Grim
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm very glad to see some intelligent discussion about the directions we need to take. I read each response and was pleased to see that many other boaters are pondering the same issues that I am. At least I know I'm not crazy. There were a lot of valid points made. Someone commented about Stu's CS floating. I've long ago decided that flying the boat is the answer, and having seen some of Stu's boats run, I will agree that are quite near being an airplane. The major problem with the current designs is that they have the aerodynamic effiency of a cinder block. I agree with some of the posts in that the boom tube's are a mojor part of the problem. If you think I'm crazy, stick a 1/2" dowel out of your truck window at 70mph, and get back with me. I think the boom tubes are so draggy that the boats weight isn't even the real issue. Who cares how much your boat weighs when half of your hosepower is being used to push a broomstick at 70 mph. Besides, if the bottom of your boat is compacting air, what percentage of the total weight are you dealing with. If the lift created by the compacted air is equal to the weight, your boat is in a state of equilibrium. Yeah, I know, the prop is still pushing X lbs, but that weight wouldn't be contributing to the hydrodynamic drag created by the sponsons. I think. Anyway, this is just my take on the issue.
 
Grimracer said:
Non Trips (up front) are not needed for anything if the turn fin is correct. The non trips and lack of them in the tests i have done have almost as many negitave effects as positive..  I have built a number of sponsons without non trips and there is a good chance that they will disapear on my boat designs in the future.Grim

68756[/snapback]

Thanks Mike,

I was particularly interested in the non trip on the outside rear sponson. Have you tested in this area?

Are you still running the same turnfin on the Ninja or has it changed recently? I'm running one of those fins on the FF21.

Tim.
 
Guys,

WOW! I figured one of two things would happen. Either I would get crucified upon starting this topic, or it would just slide off the bottom of the front page and never be seen again. 130+ replies and counting! I must say I'm proud of myself for this one.......... B)

On to the meat of the topic........

Somebody finally said it. Shove a stick out the window of a car at speed and see what you get. A TON of drag. This is a MAJOR issue. I'm not sure the airfoils are the cure, but until someone comes up with a better idea, it's for sure a band-aid. Almost ALL of this drag is caused by the air being sucked around the trailing side of the tube, and a tapered trailing edge will certainly help to reduce this effect. Again, I will say that I'm not worried about the fact that they will produce lift when the boat points skyward, as the tub is already lifting by this time.

Somebody mentioned an air "turnfin" and "rudder". This is probably not going to work. Sure, size for size, a turnfin in the air is going to have a significantly lower drag coefficient, but it is also going to have an incredibly reduced effectiveness. By the time you get enough "turnfin" in the air to make a boat turn the way you want it to, there will be ALOT more drag than a conventional sub-surface turnfin has. Not to mention that we haven't even considered any wobble or vibration that would have to be taken into account with a sail in the air at 75+ MPH.

I don't know about the other boat builders out there, but I build NO lift into my hulls what-so-ever. Once you actually induce lift into a form, it becomes a variable based on velocity, and it must be actively controlled. In order to control it, we would need, at the very least, one more channel on our radios, not to mention some sort of ESP to know EXACTLY what is going on out on the water.

The square transom thing is a dead issue, too. There is very little drag created by a square trailing edge of ANY kind. Look at your rudder (the sharper, the better right?) Look at the roof of a mini-van or truck cap. You will see a slight "ramp" right at the rear edge, this causes the air to shoot off the back, instead of being sucked down the rear panel (door, tailgate, whatever...) I'm not knocking Orlic's design at all, as it is just downright sweet, but............. The swept, tapered rear section is cool and all, and undoubtedly makes for a very smooth air-exit, but how much drag is the rudder and strut assemblies causing, now that they are FULLY exposed to that exiting airflow. I suspect he gives up most of the drag-loss he gained with the tear-drop shape to the "transom" hardware.

In case you couln't tell, I'm leaning more toward reducing aerodynamic drag than hydrodynamic.

Just some thoughts.

Thanks. Brad.

Titan Racing Components
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brad Christy said:
Guys,
Somebody finally said it. Shove a stick out the window of a car at speed and see what you get. A TON of drag. This is a MAJOR issue. I'm not sure the airfoils are the cure, but until someone comes up with a better idea, it's for sure a band-aid. Almost ALL of this drag is caused by the air being sucked around the trailing side of the tube, and a tapered trailing edge will certainly help to reduce this effect. Again, I will say that I'm not worried about the fact that they will produce lift when the boat points skyward, as the tub is already lifting by this time.

In case you couln't tell, I'm leaning more toward reducing aerodynamic drag than hydrodynamic.

Just some thoughts.

Thanks. Brad.

Titan Racing Components

68829[/snapback]


What about using eliptical tubing?
 
Joe,

Boom blocks, collars, adjustability........ ICK!

The round tubing is monumentally easier to work with in terms of incorperating it into the design of the boat. I'm going to concentrate on "add-on" airfoil shaped trailing edges attached to the existing booms. Dave Roach and I are working on some ideas already. News at ten............... B)

Thanks. Brad.

Titan Racing Components
 
Deleted due to being proven wrong by man with wind tunnel!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Guys

In the automotive field there is a critical angle at which the air will separate or be caught up in laminar flow. Hence the little lips you describe - it is better to get the airflow to separate cleanly and further behind the car than trying to have it flow down the back causing a close low pressure area and a lot of drag. This can be easily demonstrated by hatchback cars who not only have a shallow window angle to maintain the airflow contact but will use the lip spoiler approach to separate the airflow.

Don't get me wrong as I think TimD has a point in the airflow off the transom cannot be any cleaner than the ariflow of the back of the sponsin tubes. extending the transom to make a true airfoil with the hardware coming out the bottom must provide at least some aero advantage. Still think the layed down engine/pipe combo has some distinct aero advantages also.

I guess overall my thinking boils down to get the tub aero clean and lifting to carry the weight of the boat - the sponsons provide lateral stability for straightline and cornering - the small rear sponsons support the weight of the rear when coming on the plane - the engine as low profile as possible - all this leaves the engine to do is accelerate the mass. Overcoming of course any and all hydrodynamic drag. Were we to live in an ideal world. I'm not even suggesting that it would be possible to build this type of boat but it would be interesting.
 
all right here I go again.

as most of you may now i have done some cfd testing on my 45saw boats.

i already gave you some figures a while back but what it came down to was this.

Aerodynamic drag is definitely interesting at higher speeds

the biggest drag (about 47% is from the boom tubes) second for my saw boat was on the open engine. (pipe was horrible to but harder to change)

third were the sponsons and last came the tub.

what is the key to proper aerodynamics?? well it is definitely NOT the front of the thing you are looking at. you can make it square for all i care (obviously round or tapered is better) as long as you put back the energy behind the object that you have taken out on the front...... means you need to speed up the air behind the object before it separates again.....

anything that is not "up to speed" is drag.

now i did make naca profiles around my booms last year and yes it did make a difference on the saw speed i did.

there were some problems that came with the profiles however.

most of all was lift (don't want it don't need it, had enough as it was)

the second thing i am worried about is that the profiles are in front of the CG of the boat.

this means an AOA change of the boat will put the profiles in either a lifting or down position.

when this happens it won't correct itself meaning when going up it will keep going up more and more. (i did this once with a beautiful blow over from a little down wind and small hop the boat made).

if only the boom tubes were behind the CG..................... :rolleyes:

the main thing i worry about with the booms on a racing boat is that the boat hops very often as the water is rarely nice and calm like on the saw runs.

saw is a more controlled situation then racing so unless i can find a way that they will correct a AOA change and not increase the problem like they do now i won't use them on a heat racing boat.

now the other thing that interested me is going round the corner with a racing boat.

many people before have expressed that if you go down the straight at 80mph but slow down to 50 in the corner it still won't help you go any quicker.

now there was a post that i find interesting about a lost outside sponson.

this proved something again to me that i have thought about earlier.

in the corner there is a large force on the rudder.

when looking at the rear of the boat this force will push towards the left of the boat on the rudder. (the force itself will be dependant on the water pressure and rudder surface area)

with the sponsons being like a solid axle the roll centre is in the middle of the axle. therefore the force on the rudder will be like a torque around the roll centre.

much more then the CG force as i assume the CG to be almost at the same height as the roll centre so it will be negligible.

the rudder force will cause a weight shift between left and right sponson (normally i will asume weight to be devided equally when going straight)

so what if with a proper turnfin and sponson design (big enough to hold the boat upright in the corner) we can make a small right sponson that at speed would not touch the water anymore. it would only serve to get the boat on plane.

of course with not touching the water in the corner it would be nice to have it on the straight. so maybe a different sponson design to get the boat to run different in the straights? maybe the whole boat can be tilted over to the left going straight?

the roll to the right back onto the bigger sponson?

the only problem i see is the turnfin won't like this rolling motion to much.
 
Back
Top