Hull Speed

I believe I have beaten hull speed. By this I mean that I have devised a design paradigm utilizing a displacement hull, but incorporating a hydrodynamic model that is not subject to the bow/stern wave and waterline coupling problem.

I have searched the usual sites (Patent office), but can find nothing, so I filed the requisite preliminary patent application, and a search is underway.

I ran across this forum quite by accident. It seems to me to be the right place to ask the questions:

Has anyone else out there beaten hull speed?

 

All planing boats do.

 

Plenty of displacement multihulls beat their "hull speed", Any boat with a slenderness ratio of over 10 may be capable of beating hull speed. Is your design optimized for a particular S/L ratio? Offhand, I can't think of any heavy displacement hull with a L/B ratio of the normal 3 that can beat its hull speed.

 

Hull speed is an arbitrary number that is only convenient for rough calculations.

 

Not exactly an arbitrary number Gonzo.

-Tom

 

We can't even agree at what speed a boat is really planing. Hull speed is supposed to be about 1.2-1.4 times the square root of the waterline length, in knots. Planing is considered to be more than that with varying opinions. I think that the concept of "hull speed" has created a perception that it is a unmovable limit. It is only where the power needed to speed up the hull needs huge increases for little gain; that is all.

 

I am beyond curiosity about a hull form that can sidestep the laws of physics. If the OP has a patent application, he is not likely to regale us with the details.

While I am thoroughly skeptical, I wish him all success.

 

What do you mean with "hull speed"? Lack of definition!

If you mean that you have a device that is "neutralizing" wave-making, then yes there are various ways to distribute sources and sinks so that you get a cancelling effect upon the travelling wave system. The more extreme the device, the less its practical functionality though...., but as Messabout says: I'm sceptical, but good luck. And Mr Jansen: when the patent is filed, please come back and give us more info!

 

There is no sidestepping but you can push it or cheat it. Or get the hull out of the water.

 

I have been over the physics backwards and forwards, and have not violated any laws. What I have done is recognize that there is another pathway to marine hull design, marine propulsion and marine hydrodynamics (not conventional displacement hulls, not semi displacement/penetrating hulls, not planing hulls, and nothing exotic) which has been missed, so I have been following it to its logical conclusion. The odd thing about it is that hints regarding this pathway go back over 150 years.

I posted the thread because I have been trying to find out, to no avail, whether or not the technology I am developing has been anticipated. I figured that if anyone knew, it would be boat designers.

At this point, I eagerly await the results of the patent search.

I will keep everyone who follows the thread informed. After the utility patent is filed, I will share the details.

 

One more clarification is in order.

In my theoretical model, hull speed is the hydrodynamic phenomenon that occurs when the wavelength of the bow wave is equal to the waterline length of the vessel under weigh. The behavior of the stern wave is, in my view, irrelevant. When a hull exceeds hull speed, the negative half wave of the bow wave separates from the stern of the vessel, which squats, raising the bow. I view this as the onset of planing.

If my understanding of hull speed is somehow deficient, I welcome further edification.

 

I agree with all that gonzo said.

 

The fact that you are using the term "hull Speed" implies you have little grasp of hydrodynamics.

Whatever you think you have "invented" has been done before, I can assure you of that. There is no "magic" to hydrodynamics, except for the science/maths cannot always predict the observations correctly, for whatever reason (usually metrology and very complex maths).

The fact that you are filing for a patent also implies your MO is to make money alone rather than progress the science and field of naval architecture.

Forgive me for being blunt, but I think you would have had a better response if you step up onto a soap box and shouted "step right up ladies and gentlemen, i have some wonderful snake oil for sale..."

There are a few contributors on this website that actually know these fields of naval architecture very well indeed, far more than you give credit for.

 

If you felt you had a solution to the dynamic limits imposed by the hull speed phenomenon, wouldn't you want to protect your intellectual property?

When the patent application is filed, I'll happily forward a .pdf of the entire file for anyone who wants to see it.

 

Unfortunately patents aren't all they are cracked up to be. I am sure we can all do a list of boat designers that have come up with a unique and good designs just to see someone copy it. Duo-conic hull anyone...
One thing I also learned it is not just the water, but air gets moved around under a hull and that can effect what is going on more than people realize. Plus many ideas work great in a tank, but put some marine growth on it and the imperfections that real hulls have and performance gains are reduced.