Subject: Re: : Re: [harryproa] Re:: Air Cavity Hull
From: "Rick Willoughby rickwill@bigpond.net.au [harryproa]" <harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au>
Date: 9/30/2014, 6:47 PM
To: harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au
Reply-to:
harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au

 

Luc

I found I needed two cavities in the model to get pitch stability.  With a longer hull it seems reasonable to use more longitudinal cavities.  That way the side skirts can be lower and the hull able to handle larger waves without having a deep cavity.  

At present my two cavities are separated by ramps that would suit bi-directional operation but I expect the trailing ramp leads to more air entrainment at high speed than a clean transom between the cavities but with a ramp on the forward side.  I plan to compare the transom with the double ramp when I have the model going at higher speed.

With multiple cavities I do not see any benefit in using a foil to alter the surface profile under the cavity.  On a narrow hull a foil will have considerably higher drag for the generated lift than the hull alone so it is likely detrimental.

Rick
On 01/10/2014, at 5:20 AM, "lucjdekeyser@telenet.be [harryproa]" <harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au> wrote:

 Note the enhancing effect of a foil under the air pocket. So, I could have my air ventilated Visionary on foils: If enough wind the hull flies in the air. If not it still does, under water ;-)




__._,_.___

Posted by: Rick Willoughby <rickwill@bigpond.net.au>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a new topic Messages in this topic (8)

.

__,_._,___