Click for Cross Click for Westport Click for Abeking Click for Abeking Click for Westport

I'm Hoping Someone Can Check These Statistics.

Discussion in 'Technical Discussion' started by LAST HOPE, Dec 11, 2015.

You need to be registered and signed in to view this content.
  1. olderboater

    olderboater Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    Messages:
    7,132
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    I don't know what equipment they were using at that time or how they were checking at low speed. It's very difficult to get a feel at those speeds. You're sampling flow which is easy when you have a gallon per minute flowing but when it's only 7/1000th of a gallon then it's difficult unless you do it for a longer time than they do in a test. Note also they were dealing with a brand new boat and engine. Their emphasis in the test is not usage at idle. I've been around a lot of boats and read thousands of boat tests.

    I just searched to find another test with usage per hour like that. A 40 hp Mercury at 2.9 knots on a Bass Buggy uses 0.4 gph. Even a 190 hp Mercruiser at 600 rpm (2 knots) uses 0.7 gph. I cannot find any inboard at any rpm that comes under 0.7 gph. I found a 225 hp VW with 0.7 gph at 4.7 knots and 720 rpm. I'm not saying the numbers in the charts are impossible, just that I've never seen similar and never seen it in a real application. A 250 hp Lugger uses 1.2 gph at 1000 rpm.
  2. Opcn

    Opcn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Nordland (near Port Townsend), WA, USA
    The conversion from engine HP to fuel per hour is simple math. A really good marine diesel engine has an efficiency of around 60%. A gallon of diesel oil has around 140,000 BTU worth of energy in it. converting horse power to watts is similarly easy. The problem is installing the wind turbine onto the boat. It's super easy to install a 6KW wind turbine on land, the sort of thing you can have a teenager do in an evening. If you tried to install that 6KW generator on a boat small enough to go 7 knots on 8 horses worth of engine output a wind strong enough to make the generator work that hard is going to blow the boat over, maybe even blow it over completely and dunk everyone on board into the water.

    Stability calculations are something you CANNOT ignore on a boat under any circumstances. Every boat design discussion should revolve around stability calculations. If you are building a canoe it's possible to get a feel for it and build a working canoe with no education or calculations, just based on copying what others have done. If you buy a production boat they had a naval architect with literally years of intense schooling using computers way more powerful than the computers that sent us to the moon working on them. Every year backyard boat builders destroy countless hours of work or get wrecked and need to be rescued or even die at sea because they didn't pay attention to the non-trivial task of establishing and maintaining stability.

    If you look at the energy required to deliver HP to the water the turbine has to be collecting more energy than that, and since it is collecting it from the wind you are being pushed by the wind at least more than that. in order to not die, you have to either be in a craft that can handle being flipped by the wind or be in a craft that can handle having that kind of force applied to the end of a stick that goes 40' up in the air. That is not trivial to calculate. And a monohull that can handle that kind of dynamic load is not going to be able to perform anything like 7 knots with 6KW of power driving it forward, not by a long shot.
  3. Opcn

    Opcn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Nordland (near Port Townsend), WA, USA
    * too late to edit. Probably two evenings to set up a wind turbine at home. Concrete needs time to set.
  4. LAST HOPE

    LAST HOPE New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    UK
    Yes, these figures are hard to come by, I've tried looking too.

    If it were true, it would be well worth knowing what the magic formula is, just so that it could be repeated with other boats, maybe even improved, though I don't think that's too likely.
  5. LAST HOPE

    LAST HOPE New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    UK
    That boat weighed 22,000 lbs, and was 39'9" LOA, 14'2" Beam, would that be big enough?

    I was thinking about 16' up a mast for the turbine.
  6. Opcn

    Opcn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Nordland (near Port Townsend), WA, USA
    That is not enough information to do the calculations, but I suspect that it isn't nearly enough. If you have a wind turbine that is that low you risk killing someone with the blades. Additionally you are going to be paying a big performance penalty due to the interference you get from the shockwave off the blade bouncing back up off the deck, and from the much lower windspeeds at the water surface, and it is going to be very unpleasant to be that close to those spinning blades of death because of the barotrauma.

    You actually have to know what the hull is shaped like to figure it out. Absolute best case scenario for initial stability for a monohull is a barge. 22,000 lbs on a barge 40' long and 14' wide is going to be about 9.6 cubic meters of total displacement (cold salt water has a specific gravity of about 1.035) or about 7.25" of draft. If we assume that you've gone with a lead bulb on a short keep and moved the center of gravity down below the deck of the boat at deck level (which is extremely generous) and we look at the righting lever we first start with the center of buoyancy. Since we are giving you the superior barge shape we have a lovely right triangle to work off of, and the center of buoyancy is going to be at h/3 from the right corner. I ran the numbers for various angles of heel to figure out how far that 10 metric tonnes of mass would get you in terms of a righting moment and I figured out that it levels out around 15 degrees of heel at 20 meter tonnes; this is fine because your turbine is going to stop working long before you start running it at 15 degrees of heel. Well if you have it dangerously low like you are planning the center of effort is going to be at 4.877 meters above the deck, meaning that you can have a force equivalent to 4.1 metric tonnes at rest, or 5.4 horsepower if you go through several inefficient steps and assume 100% efficiency ( a wind turbine is marvelously efficient from an economic sense, but when it's lateral load you are worried about, it's going to be in the 70's peak).

    That is really the highest level of performance you can get out of a simple monohull that is 14' wide after I made several assumptions in your favor that were wildly unrealistic. The ride on that thing would be positively terrifying, even though you would be looking at less than 3 knots of speed (because the hullform has a lot of wetted surface area). You could probably go faster downwind (because the wind drag and the push force from your prop would be in the same direction and because you have a better righting moment if your long access is with the wind rather than your short access) but it is unlikely that you would outperform someone with a sail.

    I am not an NA, I can do some of the calculations because I paid attention in physics and calculus class and because my father was a boat builder and I read some of his books on the subject (the one he wrote and the several he purchased over the years). I can't do these calculations with the speed of someone more practiced and the specialized software tools required. But really look into multihulls. The most critical requirement for your application is initial stability and nothing matches a multihull for initial stability. I think that the gentlemen who made the catamaran we talked about earlier put a lot of thought and effort into his design, and had a lot of highly qualified professional help. I suspect that they settled on a multihull for a reason, and that that reason is probably the same as my reasoning for suggesting one. If you don't go down the multihull route you are talking about using extremely expensive and complex composites and complicated systems like canting keels and drop foils to develop the righting moment you need to keep your rig working at all, and for what it would cost you to build this beast that goes 4-5 yachts you could built a gazelle that can plane at 14 knots and hire a professional crew to sail her for you (with you on board should you wish) for the rest of your life.
  7. K1W1

    K1W1 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    7,388
    Location:
    My Office
    I normally associate the word barotrauma with a change in pressure not a change in velocity.

    Maybe you should read some more books.
  8. Marmot

    Marmot Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,311
    Location:
    9114 S. Central Ave
    Myth Alert

    That would be a "really good marine diesel" indeed. The highest available today is just over 50 percent and that engine is a very large slow speed 2 stroke.

    While it might seem like "simple math" it is definitely not a simple matter to map efficiency of an installed marine diesel installation across its power output range.

    Only when used in shore based power plants that recover heat (combined cycle) does thermal efficiency approach 60 percent. Most of the engines used on "yachts" of the size people here talk about probably don't achieve better than 40 percent even when operating at a peak efficiency point and we will probably see a Mr. Fusion installation on a yacht before we see a combined cycle plant.

    For some reason yacht designers completely ignore heat recovery techniques to make the boat more efficent.
  9. K1W1

    K1W1 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    7,388
    Location:
    My Office
    The builders also provide some substantial opposition to anything different to what they have done before. They will cite costs, weight, loss of range, extended delivery times and the old nugget less Owners space. They especially thrive on this last one while consuming all available storage spaces with technical things.

    A particular favourite seems to be to fit switchboards and equipment smack bang in the middle of any space they can rendering it useless for anything else.

    I am not singling out any particular yard here either, they are all as bad as each other at this practice.
  10. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,432
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    A marine diesel at very low engine speeds such as idle rpm's uses very very little fuel. A 3116 at idle in gear is going to use less than 1 gph. But I wouldn't run it that way long term. It's really hard to measure such small usage with what they are using to measure it in the boat, unless they're using the ECU on an electronic diesel, which I don't believe is the case on this test.
  11. Opcn

    Opcn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Nordland (near Port Townsend), WA, USA
    Small house or village sized windmills are super common in Alaska, I grew up within sight of a windmill dealer and have stayed in cabins powered by them. Barotrauma is the word I used because it's the word I meant. There is a shockwave off of the blade tips and it can hurt you even if the blade itself doesn't touch you, it does so by rapidly changing the pressure in such a way as to damage your tissue ... barotrauma.

    Marmot. My impression was that an appropriately sized diesel engine can get 60% of the energy in the tank into the shaft if it's really at the top end. I think that losses further on down the line are to be expected. I'll be sure to update my position in the future, thanks.

    In the end I think that what matters most in this application is how wind capture ability translates to horsepower, and how horsepower translates to movement. I was mostly trying to get past a question about something that isn't even really a pertinent topic for this application.
  12. PacBlue

    PacBlue Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,988
    Location:
    Dana Point, Ca
    It would be helpful to have the following issue of that magazine to see if they posted any corrections to the data - very common for errors and omissions in boat tests.

    I looked up a 3116 Fuel Map and at 1200rpm, was getting data at 1.8 - 2.0 gph, while the "test" states 0.8gph, seriously doubting their accuracy.

    Attached Files:

  13. olderboater

    olderboater Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    Messages:
    7,132
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    If it sounds too good to be true, then.........
  14. Oscarvan

    Oscarvan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2015
    Messages:
    969
    Location:
    Chesapeake Bay
    I'm thinking engineering is more a science than an art.
  15. Opcn

    Opcn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Nordland (near Port Townsend), WA, USA
    It's got art and science to it. Coming up with clever solutions is an art, making sure they aren't too clever by half is science.

    I really mangled that second paragraph on my long post. I went back to cut some of it out because I started writing before I ran all the numbers and I didn't rectify the grammar and for that I am sorry.

    What I was saying is that I assumed for the same of argument that it was a flat square barge, because that is the shape with the most initial stability. I figured out how deep it would be with that much displacement. I then assumed there was a ball of lead on a keel that brought the center of that mass right down to deck level. From there I used the square shape of the barge to figure out the center of buoyancy and used the center of buoyancy to figure out how much force the hull would apply to right itself at various angles (I made a stability curve). Then I looked at how much energy you could get out of a magical 100% efficient turbine 16' up off the deck (which I set as the center of mass) without tipping the boat over.
  16. LAST HOPE

    LAST HOPE New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    UK
    Sadly, I didn't buy the next month's magazine, and it could easily have taken longer for the errors to be corrected. Interesting though, that it was posted on the web, over 2 years later.

    There are so many variables in this one, and maybe I have been too late in asking.
  17. LAST HOPE

    LAST HOPE New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    UK
    That assumption was no problem, and your replies and insight are very helpful. (Everyone's posts have been, actually.) I'm not sure what weight you had accounted for, for the generator, but I was thinking 550 kg, but that, I believe, could be reduced by using carbon fiber composites.

    The multi-hull is very much a possibility, though I do only see them as safer, up to a point. (Do like the idea of something that has some chance of self righting.)

    I wasn't hoping for anything that was able to travel at competition speeds, just something that was an alternative to conventional power or sail, and could give some a chance to sail quite independently, that otherwise wouldn't have that chance.
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2015
  18. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,432
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    I've also found some of CAT's fuel charts to be very in-accurate at low RPM's. The 1 page brochure for the reman cats found in the dealership, the 375HP is accurate at low RPM's and shows (I forgot exact numbers now) something like 2 gph at 1200 rpms, yet the 420HP shows 6 gph at 1200 rpms, which I know for certain is way off. But then it was accurate at 1600 rpms and above.
  19. Opcn

    Opcn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Nordland (near Port Townsend), WA, USA
    I can understand wanting something self righting, but a wind turbine is going to need an extremely high initial stability, and high initial stability and self righting don't often go hand in hand. There are strategies and devices to right a catamaran that has capsized. They might be worth investigating if you are particularly worried,
  20. K1W1

    K1W1 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    7,388
    Location:
    My Office
    The difficulty a lot of engine mounted flow meters that feed the ECM's have is the lack of temperature compensation which can create quite a difference between what is actually burnt and what the computer sees as being burnt.

    The early electronic 3412's were particularly bad examples of the factory flow monitoring