This is a tough one.
We are looking at a twin installation with our new drive.
Now for the combination of the blackhawk/inboard or outboard combo thread with a little twist.
What will be faster, better handling, ect...
1) front props spinning inboard, rear props outboard
2) front props spinning outboard, rear props spinning inboard.
3) different ratio front and rear with different pitch to match speed or same ratio/pitch
4) # of blades front/rear 3x3 4x4 5x5 6x6 7x7 3x4 3x5 6x3
5) diameter
pat W
Results 1 to 20 of 36
-
11-05-2008 04:52 AMUnique Innovative Drivetrain Solutions
-
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Posts
- 89
12-29-2008 03:34 AMPat, That sure is a tough 1 MAN so many combo's to try and test. Looks like you have a life time project on your hands, but have to say it's way koooooool. Jay "Kaama Drives"
-
01-08-2009 01:44 AM
Pat-
I would say...
Front prop RH, aft prop LH, to counteract torque of engine. This appears to be done.
Incoming water to each propeller will be at different speeds. Aft propeller will see a faster flow as it has already been accelerated by the forward prop. Aft either needs more pitch on same ratio, or lower ratio and same pitch (more shaft speed).
Blade area for the entire unit is more or less doubled, so I could see a reduction in either number of blades or a diameter for both wheels.
In the 2nd pic, is it me or is that drive really low?
Have you run with a single prop for a baseline, either forward or aft?
Do you need that much rake if the drive is so long? Does the boat need the lift?
Black boat, external lift points, duck bill scuppers, what is this thing?
Is it possible to get some more information? I'd like to look at it more in depth...from an "engineering student" standpoint.
Brad.
-
01-10-2009 03:51 AM
Tango, Thanks for the compliment.
Brad,
Pic #2 dive is trimmed all the way in. trailer is downhill also.
ran single front on a test but it would not plane. It would cavitate when the boost would come in. We will try single rear soon.
We are running high rake, low, diameter, pitch,blade count, and cup on the rear vs the 4blade 19x41 lead prop. The boat runs flat no matter what. The cg is way too far forward because of cockpit placement.
The boat is a 23 ft carbon prepreg, nomex core, autoclave cured. 24 deg non step single 315 diesel. We are going to step the motor to a 600hp diesel and change overall ratio to match the twin install. 6 seat open deck. We are going to finish initial testing before stepping into the new hull.
pat WUnique Innovative Drivetrain Solutions
-
01-13-2009 02:04 AM
Pat, sounds like you have a fun little project. Is this by chance something for the Navy, maybe CCD or PMS 325?
600 hpnshould make that boat fly, especially with enough prop in the water to make it hook up. Out of curiosity, what diesel with that power/weight are you running? Thing has to be light to be in 23' of boat. Torque numbers have to be huge. 41" is big, but I'm sure shaft speed is low enough to pull it. Efficiency should increase as a result.
Let us know how it goes.
Brad H.
-
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Posts
- 89
03-09-2009 01:30 AMPat, why such a tall pitch in front ? does she actually launch of the rear wheel to get on plane ? also what are the relative prop. rpm's ? equal or diff.from front to rear as BradH has suggested ? also is the diesel being over-driven ?
-
03-19-2009 02:47 PM
Hey Pat, what ever happened with this project?
-
04-02-2009 03:14 PM
Any update Pat? Really interested in this.
-
08-01-2009 06:11 AM
Regrouping is the easiest answer. Nothing wrong with the drive just the people involved with us on the project.
Working on the twin because the single is gone.
Tango,
The removal of the rear prop and not getting on plane showed that it was lacking in bite. Full revs and no boost. There was thrust just not enough to get on plane.
We can run any ratio combination front to rear. The initial testing was equal to keep things somewhat simple. We will eventually try as many combinations as possible to get some questions answered.
We have been experimenting on the twin gas boat with the new props and that has been interesting. We also recieved the latest props from Throttle Up to try and see if we went too far. The last set we recieved from them was excellent. When we get to test the twin diesel we will run the same props on the rear.
pat WUnique Innovative Drivetrain Solutions
-
08-01-2009 06:17 AM
Also the initial question was directed to thoughts on running a twin engine twin drive installation.
pat WUnique Innovative Drivetrain Solutions
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,125
08-03-2009 05:51 PMI have a prop question for you Pat. the props your using are they the same thread for both as a blackhawk? reason I'm asking is a couple of the 20 cigs with big power and we can only find 31's... do you have some of higher pitches?
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 3,107
08-04-2009 09:22 AMPat,
I saw Tom Abrams 20 Cig in NYC with a Blackhawk. They had a surface style prop on the leading prop and somewhat of a round-ear prop on the trailing prop. Not sure why, just thought I'd mention!
Pretty cool stuff you're doing!
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,125
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 3,107
08-05-2009 09:07 AMI hear ya. I've seen a few different variations on the props.
-
08-10-2009 02:17 AM
The prop we have is different. I will check around. I know Nigel hook used to race one and they used to weld different configurations for his boat.
The ear on the prop changes the lift and they were using existing props / B1's
Andreas (platinum) just brought his 20 cig back from europe so I will quiz him on his set-ups. He has a 588 cid in his.
pat WUnique Innovative Drivetrain Solutions
-
08-11-2009 09:28 AM
Pat - It seems to me that if the loading and torque is balanced between the front and rear props (net zero torque), there's no need to reverse the rotation(s) between the port and starboard drives. (The Swedes don't bother....) :
-
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Where the summer never ends
- Posts
- 4,346
-
08-22-2009 01:56 AM
I think there is a lot the current manufactures miss when it comes to performance vs cost. The tooling for the lead prop........ eeehhh, we will make them all Lh to counter the engine torque.
The rear prop on a dual is 30% less effective than the front.
Something tells me there will be a marked improvement in performance with the props running opposite.
I cannot wait to get some of this off my mind.
pat WUnique Innovative Drivetrain Solutions
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- West Michigan
- Posts
- 37,972
- Blog Entries
- 45
08-22-2009 07:58 AMYou are outside my realm here, but. Some of the single engine races run left hand on all their setups to counter the engine torque at all times. If that is true, wouldn't the front prop always be the lefty and the rear same as engine rotation? The 30% seems to be the compromise for the tooling cost that would make sense due to torque.
Getting bad advice is unfortunate, taking bad advice is a Serious matter!!
-
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Where the summer never ends
- Posts
- 4,346
08-22-2009 09:05 AMWhat i never understood is why a LH against the tourque in a LH (standard)motor ???
Does not make any sense to me.
If u look from the back of the boat all the standard engines turn left,,so why would u want a LH drive on there ????
If that would be the case ,all the single engine boats build would have a LH drive on it ?! NO ????
My single 32 with 800HP and a SSM has a RH drive ,the boat is very light and it does not lean to either side at all.