Hull Speed

The Russian Navy (pre-collapse) built at least one submarine based upon a dynamic model similar to the one I have developed. I learned of it when I was invited to present some of my early work in boundary layer control to the Navy 2035 conference some years back.

I reiterate: I have developed a theoretical hydrodynamic model in which a displacement hull is not subject to the conventional limitations commonly known as "hull speed."

After the utility patent is filed, I will revisit this forum and provide access to an appropriate download.

 

Oh... what the hell... I'll take a punt.... I'm guessing you've conceived something along the lines of a submarine-shaped 'underbody' that operates below the surface, connected to the 'hull' of the vessel via slender struts. The hull, of course doesn't come into contact with the surface.

Am I right?

If do, your patent application won't go far, because it has indeed been done (many times) before and is most commonly referred to as a SWATH.
AdHoc is a world-expert on them...

If I'm wrong... I too wish you luck and wait with baited breath....

 

Fascinating!
Do you use mathematical equations and proofs in your independent research?

Just for interest, why do you think that the concept of "hull speed" is important in ship hydrodynamics?

 

The point to this thread is ???? Beats me. I once met a chap who claimed to have beaten the odds at roulette. Unfortunately, he was still in paid employment, which greatly detracted from the credibility of his assertion, for me, anyway.

 

Sorry, it's nothing like a SWATH (not even close). It's a displacement monohull. Catamaran and Trimaran hulls are also readily derivable without violating the design brief.

I had already formulated by basic design principles before I was informed about the Russian work.

I've been burned by premature disclosure in the past, so I hope you will pardon me for retaining my trade secrets.

I will tell you this much: the hull design emerged as a logical consequence of my independent research into boundary layer control by mechanical means (no moving parts). I have been able to maintain organized flow in systems which normally collapse into turbulence.

As mentioned in previous posts, a working knowledge of applied chaos theory is useful, including a bit of fractal mathematics. It also helps to know a bit of topology. Some of the math is fairly arcane, and some of it may be original, which may explain why I'm the inventor, and not someone else.

 

Ahh... it was worth a try....

I understand your reticence to disclose details.... I'd do the same.....
But can you tell us this... will the patent (or the info you provide to the forum once you are prepared to do so, include pretty pictures? Because I do so hate maths...!!

 

I can see one major problem if your hull is shaped like a donut.

 

Very hard to dunk something that size

 

Well,as we don't know what direction you're aiming we may only speculate. But there are ways to shape a planing surface with (theoretically) zero wave resistance. Since you are hinting at boundary layer control, there are also schemes to improve propulsor efficiency by harnessing the energy within the BL, at the same time reducing friction and induced losses. I believe these ideas might well be carried further.

One practical consequence of these considerations is the combined improvement of hull efficiency and waterjet efficiency when waterjets are taking in the major part of working fluid from the BL. Here, the effective inlet width is practically equal to hull beam. Working along these lines, it would probably be possible to find further improvements.

So, good luck and forgive us for beeing a grumpy bunch, but we have seen too many perpetuum mobiles along our journey....

 

Rolling donut hulls even present problems
but maybe a caravan effect by pulling ducted bow thruster¿
Realy wonder what you invented, patents cost tho
make sure, take care and wish you well, and in time: tell!

 

Point taken David. I thought the second sentence could have been more explicit. Cheers.

 

Don't worry, Yipster: there is no invention, and there will be no patent.
The clue is the way he talks about "hull speed". It is complete nonsense.

 

:d:d:d:d:d:d

 

Robert, sounds interesting, is this work published? If so, could you please give access to the documents? I'm really curious about it.
Tks.

 

"I've been burned by premature disclosure in the past..."

RJ,

Do tell, what were the past inventions?

Now that they're "out" you can talk all day about them right?

Just the Readers Digest version would be fine.

Check out SWASH if you liked SWATH, they're even cooler!

-Tom