Wave Creation

It cancels out the wave on one side of the vessel through the mechanism of wave interference.
Regarding the efficiency, please re-read my post. I've explained why it implies an increase of efficiency.

If you have, say, 100 HP of power to spend for the creation of waves, two scenarios are possible:
1) you create symmetrical wave train, thus dedicating 50 HP to each side (port and starboard);
2) you create an assymmetrical wave train like Weinblum, thus using all 100 HP (in ideal case) for making a wave train in the desired direction only.

The formula for wave power is given here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_power#Wave_power_formula. It says that, everything else being equal, the wave height is proportional to the Power^0.5.
So, since in case 2 the power input for a wave train on the desired side is twice that of the case 1, it means that the Weinblum configuration could ideally give you 40% higher waves for the total power input of 100 HP.
Of course, in real life it would be an unknown fraction of that value, but IMO still better than dissipating waves (and power) in all directions around the boat.

Cheers

 

There are many different systems that still need investigating for
this application.

The attached paper about the development of a continuously surfable
wave in a circular tank used Michlet as a preliminary method to
calculate wave heights. Even though the program is ill-suited for
large wave-makers, it can give the relative merits of different
shapes very quickly.

 

Martin R. Renilson... The world is a small place indeed.

Thanks for the paper Leo. Looks like CFD would be more suitable tool for the analysis. Michlet predictions are way off the target in this particular case.