Walt, I know I'm being pedantic here but if your baseline efficiency is 50% and you increase it to 85% it's a 35 percentage point increase but a 70% (35/50) increase in efficiency. Neat concept but the real question is: "Can you fish off of it? anyway I enjoyed the video looks like cool concept
Its efficient cruise speed would be maybe useful if you've already hooked a swordfish or something else very fast. Would definitely be loud and windy on deck though. I'd be interested to see a video where they walk through the whole entire design. Haven't said much about the foils themselves yet, and the main wing seems fairly thin for a WIG type use, my gut says the above water portion is designed to a higher speed than the foils and submerged props can support.
Both of those have limits. The tradeoffs between ducts, and non ducts, and the benefits of driving a secondary turbine all have inflection points in their efficiency curves. Depends on loads, design speeds, motor torque, turbine rpm, because it rolls back around to diameter, pitch, and how much thrust needs to be developed. And thrust and speed have a weird relationship with eachother when it comes to props/turbines. Driving water with a prop you're constantly fighting a battle against cavitation, in air, against supersonic flow. In water, that cavitation can happen on your duct, and your prop.
I'm so excited about American boat designs and dreams. In the 80s, there was a television show called "Beyond 2000" which had a surface boat like a pelican in Miami.
For electric motors, energy density (for energy storage on board) is still a huge factor. The comparative numbers are roughly 11,000 W-hr/kg for gasoline vs 250 W-hr/kg for Li-ion batteries. Newer battery technology will help, but there's a long way to go to make up for the difference in efficiencies claimed here. The development is, however, interesting. The best applications might be short-run commutes.
Worth noticing that there is a vast use of ferries that do trips of minutes to a couple of hours. Battery energy storage is ideally suited to such use today. "The busiest ferry route in the world is the Dover to Calais crossing" - it's 27 miles. No problem for today's batteries.
Just quickly, an average sized ferry has about 10,000 hp in engines for an equivalent 7.5 million watts. For a 1/2 hour commute, that's 3.75 million watt-hours. At a generous 300 watt-hours per kg, that requires about 12,500 kg of batteries. Certainly doable.
love your work walt ! foiling is changing all the time in americas cup as they learn more. keep up the innovation philosophy you famous for ignore the critics all the best
But the noise. I mean a small drone makes you crazy with the prop noise, I can only imagine the ducted props. No I am sure there will be lots of design changes to decrease prop noise, so the concept deserves a chance. Good luck!
A major noise generator of rotating propellers is called thickness noise generation. Propellers for high-torque and high rpm motors can take advantage of this problem and others. I do not believe the complex propeller design physics was available for the old craft, as the math and design, now CAD and AI- aided is still in nascent stage.
Great to see such innovative radical thinking, as a fellow boat designer with radical ideas, protecting the design from copies is the hardest most costly part!
he didn't say it flat out but he did mention "hybrid" so I think for now, it will also have a generator burning possibly diesel to power the electric motors.
@@AntiVaganza in boats, diesel piston driven electric traction motors have been around since 1903, Steam turbine drive electric traction motors in 1919, gas turbine not much later. So not exactly revolutionary. Definitely a usable tech. But there are still conversion losses to contend with when looking at total system efficiency.
combining sail (which has numerous technological options) with auxiliary solar electric power would seem to be an even greater. Electric motors themselves tend to be of 3 types, induction, DC, and the mixed Synchronous motor design. Ocean waves include short wavelength and longer, larger Swells, so drawings/paintings do not correctly show the travel or the dimensions in which a successful craft operates. Sailors understand the seeming chaos of perhaps 3 swells plus local wind waves. In regions like the Southern Ocean and anywhere swells are generated by strong winds plus significant fetch - the vector length of consistent wind direction, A craft will necessarily be lifted differentially when moving at different relative directions to swell or short-period (wavelength) wind waves. The design will be refined in relation to the use of the craft, from large transport to small recreational craft.
I recall reading somewhere that for lower speed craft (like displacement hulls) that water props would be way more efficient than air props ... and that air props get better at higher speed more easily driven hulls ... like your craft ... does that sound correct?
Sure is. "Water propellers are generally more efficient than air propellers because water has less "slip" than air: Density: Water is about 1,000 times denser than air, so airplanes need to move more air to create the same momentum as a ship propeller moving water. "
what is the change in distribution of lift of the different modes, hull, hydrofoil, propellers and surface effect in the subsequent stages of speed and height above the surface? I presume the boat never fully flies above the water surface like SE ships do.
The 2 problems I see are too much speed + 50 Mph and you hit something in the water and catastrophic foil failure occurs with a huge loss of efficiencies at those high speeds with decreased ranges. 25 Moh still gets you up on foils with much longer range. The 2 nd major problem is the massive noise with ducted electric propulsion made from the blades. It’s not a quiet electric solution at all in fact the opposite- it is so loud you will go deaf.
Ducted is quieter than not, generally, as the greatest noise comes from high tip mach. The trick is to balance the fans (number, diameter, pitch, rpm) against the loads (hydro drag, lift induced drag, total craft mass, and desired acceleration performance) well.
Love the concept, some wind generation would help provide more power for better range or speed. Also love the sailboat in the backround, what model and make is she?
Just basic high school phisics. In rough numbers water is 1000 times denser thaN air. Means you need 1000 times more propeller area to get the same thrust, RPM being rqual. So without calculating anithing seems like, once the craft is out of the water, the air propellers will need higher RPM, and having to be much bigger, need just as much energy to spin. So what we gaind there we lost here. Isn't that so? All that said I aplaud you for trying.
Water propellers lose 50% of efficiency over air propellers ??? Yeah, lost your credibility there. "Water propellers are generally more efficient than air propellers because water has less "slip" than air: Density: Water is about 1,000 times denser than air, so airplanes need to move more air to create the same momentum as a ship propeller moving water. "
@johannwolf1 Um, Google the word "efficiency " Not the same thing as velocity. That's why a ton of Cargo on a container ship is far cheaper than on a plane. That's why English Channel Hydrofoils and Hovercraft have been replaced by conventional shipping
As soon as you get your license for a small nuclear generator you will be able to move the distances your talking about. A piece of cake. Endless supply of water to keep it cool. Those nuclear subs still prefer old fashioned propeller screws but they got more drag than you.
Shaft horsepower is measured after many of the losses you claim. Propeller Efficiency is more complicated. In simple terms either the slower turning (larger diameter) a "water" propeller turns the more efficient it can be, think an ocean going tug. The faster turning (smaller diameter) the more efficient it is, or can be be, think Malcolm Campbells "Bluebird". The middle ground is where big losses are. Common in this are large horse power, small propellers due to typically vessel draft restrictions. But the real equation is "how much weight (weight equals comfort) is being moved"? The diesel engine is very difficult to beat - electric will never have the range or weight moving ability.
If air propellers are so efficient, why are they not used on ships today? On this particular craft, they are definitely superior. There are no issues of cavitation and ventilation, for example. But I think that this craft will be limited to nearly ideal conditions (relatively calm waters and light winds). In high winds, especially headwinds, it would likely be in trouble. Also, it would have extremely limited payload capacity, as well as extreme vulnerability to submerged obstacles, as all hydrofoils. But, within these limitations, it would be very fast for its power.
Kurt Hughes and Paul Beiker have been designing and building hulls that look very similar for over a decade at least I believe. As far as a patent goes, Tom Edison filed and secured patents on other people's work too, that's nothing new. An electric wheel was patented for moon buggy, the USN prototype hydrofoils 50 years ago ? Don't pat yourself on the back too much I'm guessing you have lawyers saying this is your baby run with it. I'm still skeptical, I'd love to operate one of your boats, but not on Columbia bar or Dixon entrance
propellers are airscrews. They must pull/push better when the density of the medium is increased so the propeller get a better grip. What am I missing here? Why air propellers are better than water propellers? Think of yourself running on ice and running on dry tarmac which one is easier? of course the grippy medium is easier.
That's great for the weekender boater or retired person . Now integrate this into the smaller 25 to 40ft commercial fishing boats and I'd be impressed. Allowing these smaller boats to fish further from shore for a longer period of time, get their faster and cut down on local polluted waterways while increasing habitats & fish populations.
Commercial fishing is a severe problem, scraping the oceans of biological life, and inducing increased likelihood of local extirpations and extinctions as a result of overfishing and consequent replacement by other species. this causes entirely different systems to arise, and though nearly every protein can be eaten by the overblown human population, the problem of cascading extinctions and replacement by other types of organisms is not wise. Commercial fishing MUST be reduced and highly regulated.
Electric motors = Less weight = more energy = more range. There's the lie right there, no mention of energy density. Diesel is more energy dense than ANY electric battery, pound for pound (Kg if your a Europoor) diesel engines have a longer range! Stick a diesel engine on one of these and it will go further! Fact!
Yah and I invented perpetual motion. Electric motors are not that efficient. The reason is that you have to generate the electricity. Steam turbins most commonly used in electricity production are only about 37% efficient. Secondly, batteries do not store all the energy required to charge them. Percentages are typically around 85%. BLDC motors are often around 85%. That puts you at a total efficiency rating of around 26%. YOU ARE A LIAR!
I'll put the solar farms here in Florida up against your coal plants any day. What are you, an oil industry shill? Go back to your garage with your running diesel engines.
It is so good to see this icon of boat design and building still engaging his mind and fully involved in life. Go Walt Go!
He is only in his late 60’s. Got another 10+ years to go.
Fantastic!! Thanks for not retiring Walter 😁
a thrilling union of experience and advanced thinking,Walt Schulz the pioneer!!!!
Patent your design and who! I love your Shannon design in which an European company derived from it!
This looks very interesting. Can't wait to see what becomes of this tech. I'm a fan of Walt's from the Ran-day interviews. Go Walter!
I'm from the Ran-day crowd as well.
Keep up the good work! Research and innovation is the way to go.
Walt, I know I'm being pedantic here but if your baseline efficiency is 50% and you increase it to 85% it's a 35 percentage point increase but a 70% (35/50) increase in efficiency. Neat concept but the real question is: "Can you fish off of it? anyway I enjoyed the video looks like cool concept
Its efficient cruise speed would be maybe useful if you've already hooked a swordfish or something else very fast. Would definitely be loud and windy on deck though. I'd be interested to see a video where they walk through the whole entire design. Haven't said much about the foils themselves yet, and the main wing seems fairly thin for a WIG type use, my gut says the above water portion is designed to a higher speed than the foils and submerged props can support.
Yeah it doesn't sound like a fishin boat 😂
It sounds good...I wonder how winds affect it?
you get more efficiency in the prop if you put a duct around it. you get even more efficiency if you use contra rotating props
Both of those have limits. The tradeoffs between ducts, and non ducts, and the benefits of driving a secondary turbine all have inflection points in their efficiency curves. Depends on loads, design speeds, motor torque, turbine rpm, because it rolls back around to diameter, pitch, and how much thrust needs to be developed. And thrust and speed have a weird relationship with eachother when it comes to props/turbines. Driving water with a prop you're constantly fighting a battle against cavitation, in air, against supersonic flow. In water, that cavitation can happen on your duct, and your prop.
Awesome use of your expertise, time and resources Walt!
I'm so excited about American boat designs and dreams.
In the 80s, there was a television show called "Beyond 2000" which had a surface boat like a pelican in Miami.
You guys nailing it.
Well done to
Can't wait.
Shannon leading the way.
For electric motors, energy density (for energy storage on board) is still a huge factor. The comparative numbers are roughly 11,000 W-hr/kg for gasoline vs 250 W-hr/kg for Li-ion batteries. Newer battery technology will help, but there's a long way to go to make up for the difference in efficiencies claimed here. The development is, however, interesting. The best applications might be short-run commutes.
Worth noticing that there is a vast use of ferries that do trips of minutes to a couple of hours. Battery energy storage is ideally suited to such use today.
"The busiest ferry route in the world is the Dover to Calais crossing" - it's 27 miles. No problem for today's batteries.
@springford9511 are any of those ferries electric?
Just quickly, an average sized ferry has about 10,000 hp in engines for an equivalent 7.5 million watts. For a 1/2 hour commute, that's 3.75 million watt-hours. At a generous 300 watt-hours per kg, that requires about 12,500 kg of batteries. Certainly doable.
He's talking hybrid, meaning the energy is still carried mostly in diesel fuel.
love your work walt ! foiling is changing all the time in americas cup as they learn more. keep up the innovation philosophy you famous for ignore the critics all the best
But the noise. I mean a small drone makes you crazy with the prop noise, I can only imagine the ducted props. No I am sure there will be lots of design changes to decrease prop noise, so the concept deserves a chance. Good luck!
Yep, it was propellor noise that killed ACV (hovercaft) development all those years ago …
A major noise generator of rotating propellers is called thickness noise generation. Propellers for high-torque and high rpm motors can take advantage of this problem and others. I do not believe the complex propeller design physics was available for the old craft, as the math and design, now CAD and AI- aided is still in nascent stage.
So excited to see Walt's new venture! Bravo,
(I've been a subscriber for years.)
thanks ,good job ,we need this step forward
Great to see such innovative radical thinking, as a fellow boat designer with radical ideas, protecting the design from copies is the hardest most costly part!
You started by saying electric ducted air propulsion, but half way through it changed to electric "hybrid" you didn't mention what the hybrid part is?
"Nothing more efficient than an electric motor"
And no energy storage less efficient than electric batteries unfortunately.
he didn't say it flat out but he did mention "hybrid" so I think for now, it will also have a generator burning possibly diesel to power the electric motors.
@@AntiVaganza in boats, diesel piston driven electric traction motors have been around since 1903, Steam turbine drive electric traction motors in 1919, gas turbine not much later. So not exactly revolutionary. Definitely a usable tech. But there are still conversion losses to contend with when looking at total system efficiency.
combining sail (which has numerous technological options) with auxiliary solar electric power would seem to be an even greater.
Electric motors themselves tend to be of 3 types, induction, DC, and the mixed Synchronous motor design.
Ocean waves include short wavelength and longer, larger Swells, so drawings/paintings do not correctly show the travel or the dimensions in which a successful craft operates.
Sailors understand the seeming chaos of perhaps 3 swells plus local wind waves. In regions like the Southern Ocean and anywhere swells are generated by strong winds plus significant fetch - the vector length of consistent wind direction,
A craft will necessarily be lifted differentially when moving at different relative directions to swell or short-period (wavelength) wind waves.
The design will be refined in relation to the use of the craft, from large transport to small recreational craft.
I recall reading somewhere that for lower speed craft (like displacement hulls) that water props would be way more efficient than air props ... and that air props get better at higher speed more easily driven hulls ... like your craft ... does that sound correct?
Sure is. "Water propellers are generally more efficient than air propellers because water has less "slip" than air:
Density: Water is about 1,000 times denser than air, so airplanes need to move more air to create the same momentum as a ship propeller moving water. "
@@dnomyarnostaw 800x is a better rule of thumb. 816x, but it depends on altitude and salinity.
So cool. Look forward to more on this!
Sounds like a wet dream to me
Maybe you should get a cybertrash to pull it around with
Great idea ! Build it !!
what is the change in distribution of lift of the different modes, hull, hydrofoil, propellers and surface effect in the subsequent stages of speed and height above the surface? I presume the boat never fully flies above the water surface like SE ships do.
It is a 70% increase in useful force.
Huge jump forward in the boating industry led by an expert in marine engineering.
Hovercraft have been doing that for years, air cushion and props above water but oh so noisy, will electric be any different.😊
The 2 problems I see are too much speed + 50 Mph and you hit something in the water and catastrophic foil failure occurs with a huge loss of efficiencies at those high speeds with decreased ranges. 25 Moh still gets you up on foils with much longer range. The 2 nd major problem is the massive noise with ducted electric propulsion made from the blades. It’s not a quiet electric solution at all in fact the opposite- it is so loud you will go deaf.
Ducted is quieter than not, generally, as the greatest noise comes from high tip mach. The trick is to balance the fans (number, diameter, pitch, rpm) against the loads (hydro drag, lift induced drag, total craft mass, and desired acceleration performance) well.
Love the concept, some wind generation would help provide more power for better range or speed. Also love the sailboat in the backround, what model and make is she?
What happens when going down wind?
The cross-channel Hovercraft were really noisy
Just basic high school phisics. In rough numbers water is 1000 times denser thaN air. Means you need 1000 times more propeller area to get the same thrust, RPM being rqual. So without calculating anithing seems like, once the craft is out of the water, the air propellers will need higher RPM, and having to be much bigger, need just as much energy to spin. So what we gaind there we lost here. Isn't that so?
All that said I aplaud you for trying.
Water propellers lose 50% of efficiency over air propellers ??? Yeah, lost your credibility there.
"Water propellers are generally more efficient than air propellers because water has less "slip" than air:
Density: Water is about 1,000 times denser than air, so airplanes need to move more air to create the same momentum as a ship propeller moving water. "
Which is why boats are so much faster than airplanes
@johannwolf1 Um, Google the word "efficiency "
Not the same thing as velocity.
That's why a ton of Cargo on a container ship is far cheaper than on a plane.
That's why English Channel Hydrofoils and Hovercraft have been replaced by conventional shipping
@@johannwolf1 depends what you're doing, and how heavy you are, AAND how draggy your vessel is.
@weatheranddarkness Really? Name me one ship that is faster than an airplane ?
As soon as you get your license for a small nuclear generator you will be able to move the distances your talking about.
A piece of cake. Endless supply of water to keep it cool. Those nuclear subs still prefer old fashioned propeller screws but they got more drag than you.
CovaConcepts has produced a prototype RC ducted fan boat as proof of concept with sights set on a full scale craft.
Shaft horsepower is measured after many of the losses you claim. Propeller Efficiency is more complicated. In simple terms either the slower turning (larger diameter) a "water" propeller turns the more efficient it can be, think an ocean going tug. The faster turning (smaller diameter) the more efficient it is, or can be be, think Malcolm Campbells "Bluebird". The middle ground is where big losses are. Common in this are large horse power, small propellers due to typically vessel draft restrictions.
But the real equation is "how much weight (weight equals comfort) is being moved"? The diesel engine is very difficult to beat - electric will never have the range or weight moving ability.
weight equals comfort? How do you figure that?
Aerodynamics! airflow pushes against the surface which increases efficiencies!
If my combustion engine breaks down in bfe, they'll have parts. Your electric bandwagon motor, I'm screwed.
If air propellers are so efficient, why are they not used on ships today?
On this particular craft, they are definitely superior. There are no issues of cavitation and ventilation, for example. But I think that this craft will be limited to nearly ideal conditions (relatively calm waters and light winds). In high winds, especially headwinds, it would likely be in trouble. Also, it would have extremely limited payload capacity, as well as extreme vulnerability to submerged obstacles, as all hydrofoils.
But, within these limitations, it would be very fast for its power.
Kurt Hughes and Paul Beiker have been designing and building hulls that look very similar for over a decade at least I believe.
As far as a patent goes, Tom Edison filed and secured patents on other people's work too, that's nothing new.
An electric wheel was patented for moon buggy, the USN prototype hydrofoils 50 years ago ?
Don't pat yourself on the back too much I'm guessing you have lawyers saying this is your baby run with it.
I'm still skeptical, I'd love to operate one of your boats, but not on Columbia bar or Dixon entrance
Ducted fan noise is EXTREAM.
propellers are airscrews. They must pull/push better when the density of the medium is increased so the propeller get a better grip. What am I missing here? Why air propellers are better than water propellers? Think of yourself running on ice and running on dry tarmac which one is easier? of course the grippy medium is easier.
Anyone that has swam with a pair of swim fins on knows it's easier to push water with his feet than air.
Nothing new under the Sun.
Carnivore menu Baby!
Bravo, Walt! You are doing something great here. If your life’s goal is to make the world a better place, you can officially check that box.
Didn't the Australians build a successful surface effect boat decades ago?
I know the Russians built a monster with many jet engines.
aircraft use groud effect! over the ocean!
This is ridiculousl. Everything he is preaching has been done. Useless craft with no use case.
That's great for the weekender boater or retired person . Now integrate this into the smaller 25 to 40ft commercial fishing boats and I'd be impressed. Allowing these smaller boats to fish further from shore for a longer period of time, get their faster and cut down on local polluted waterways while increasing habitats & fish populations.
Commercial fishing is a severe problem, scraping the oceans of biological life, and inducing increased likelihood of local extirpations and extinctions as a result of overfishing and consequent replacement by other species.
this causes entirely different systems to arise, and though nearly every protein can be eaten by the overblown human population, the problem of cascading extinctions and replacement by other types of organisms is not wise.
Commercial fishing MUST be reduced and highly regulated.
th-cam.com/video/GCJ-nDz7B1U/w-d-xo.htmlsi=jRX8-rN-STHO7n8w
Electric motors = Less weight = more energy = more range. There's the lie right there, no mention of energy density.
Diesel is more energy dense than ANY electric battery, pound for pound (Kg if your a Europoor) diesel engines have a longer range!
Stick a diesel engine on one of these and it will go further! Fact!
The propulsion might be more efficient, but the boat will not be practical or useful for anyone
Yah and I invented perpetual motion. Electric motors are not that efficient. The reason is that you have to generate the electricity. Steam turbins most commonly used in electricity production are only about 37% efficient. Secondly, batteries do not store all the energy required to charge them. Percentages are typically around 85%. BLDC motors are often around 85%. That puts you at a total efficiency rating of around 26%. YOU ARE A LIAR!
I'll put the solar farms here in Florida up against your coal plants any day. What are you, an oil industry shill? Go back to your garage with your running diesel engines.