« Reply #15 on: Oct 23, 2016, 6:14 pm »
 
Tech Corner 3: Understanding Fans and Propellors

Fan v. Propeller ... Now there's a subject that caused many debates over the years! Why do bigger fans create more thrust? And why do smaller fans make a faster craft? And is that even true?

And whilst we're on the subject, why did the Guy Martin hovercraft speed record attempt fail? The main reason is simple - the wrong fan, no matter how much much power he had, with that fan his speed was always limited to about the 85mph mark - all very predictable. Let's get to grips with it.

Eh????

So I just said that bigger fans make more thrust and that smaller fans make craft go faster - that, surely, is nonsense? Actually, no, both statements are true and that's one of the reasons why this debate rages on, and just to add to the confusion few people get the difference between fast round a racetrack and fast down the straight, which are not the same thing. But, the good news is that the truth is actually quite simple when you get down to it. No fancy maths needed, all you have to do us realign your common sense and it should come clear.

What type of thrust?

There is static thrust and dynamic (moving) thrust. They're different! Well, obviously thrust is thrust, but what you measure when static using a spring balance will be different to what you measure (if you could) whilst moving along at speed. Let's explain.

Thrust reduces as you go faster

This is the first thing that we need to remember - the first rule of thrust. As you get faster, the thrust produced goes down. Even with the same power applied. By 35mph the average 900mm fan has reduced it's thrust by a huge 40%! You can check this out using the craft performance calculator.

Why, I hear you say? Think of it like this. When you are static, you bring air in at nought mph and chuck it out the back at say 80mph. Theres a huge difference between the in and out speed and that's what creates the thrust. However, when you're doing 40 mph you're bringing in air that (as far as the craft/fan is concerned) is already doing 40mph, and sadly you're still chucking it out the back at the same 80mph. Theres less difference and therefore less thrust. If you were lucky enough to be doing 80mph then you'd be getting air in at 80 and sending it out at 80. Therefore no thrust at all ! This gives an absolute on craft speed and (massive understatement!) limit is really important if you're designing a speed record craft.

Bigger fans give more static thrust.

This is the second rule of thrust. For a given power, a bigger fan will give more static thrust. It's a big deal, if you double the fan area you can get 40% more thrust from the same hp. That's why fans are getting bigger all the time. So why does this happen?

This is because of a weird relationship between the power consumed and thrust produced. Turns out that the power needed to throw air out the back depends on the air flow rate times air exit speed squared. But the thrust depends on the air flow rate times exit speed straight. If you go to a larger duct with 2 times the exit area it will halve the exit speed, the power needed to shift a given amount of air reduces to a quarter, but (and this is the key bit) the thrust only reduces to half. To get the original thrust back you can double the air flow rate, which of course doubles the new power - but 2 times a quarter is only a half! You now have the same thrust but for half the power. I'll say it again!! Double the prop/fan area and you get the same thrust for half the power! Now, that's why ducts are getting bigger.

Props give less thrust than fans but they go faster.

This is the third rule that you need. Once you have these three, then you have everything you need to understand why Guy failed in his attempt.

It turns out that an open propeller behaves like a duct of half the area. The reasons for this are complex, but it turns out the air carries on accelerating even after it had left the props. It's all due to static pressure, and we don't need to worry about the whys of this but, just know that it happens. Ducts were originally designed to stop this happening - which they do, if they are long enough. Back to this point later.

What is a fan anyway?

Sounds like an obvious thing. We all know what a fan looks like - it's got a duct, a prop does not, and that's the difference. Well, yes that is true but we do need to know a bit more than that to understand things.

The key is what the duct does. This is going to sound barmy, but what the duct does is slow down the exit air, and thats why it creates more thrust. !!! Yep, hp for hp, slow air gives more thrust - this is exactly the same as the second rule of thrust, the duct makes the fan behave like a bigger prop. For this to work, the duct has to be long enough - about the same length as the diameter.

So .... what's a prop?

A prop is exactly the same as a fan except no duct. Obvious statement really - but no, there's no fundamental difference. One little difference should be mentioned, whilst a fan is 'active' right to the tip, a prop has the tips washed out so that they're not doing anything, to reduce eddys that otherwise would form at the tip sucking away power without creating thrust. The fan gets away without this, as it has the duct to do the same job.

Key to understanding a prop is the air exit velocity. It's exactly twice that of the fan! Remember what it said about slow air makes more thrust, hp for hp? So the prop will make less STATIC thrust. Note the naughty little word 'static' ,we'll come back to this later. But here's a hint - if you want to go fast in a straight line, you want a prop.

Incidentally, if you've ever tried to use a multi wing fan without a duct, and found the result to be very poor thrust, it's the tip eddys that got you, consuming hp without making thrust.

What about shrouded props?

If a prop must have the tips washed out, and a duct must be as long as it is wide, what is it if you get a fan but put it in a short duct? That's a shrouded prop! A shrouded prop has the advantage that no washout is needed, and the shroud (duct) only had to be very short.

A shrouded prop has a higher exit velocity than a ducted fan, nearer to a prop in fact, and does not need the washout tips. So it sits in the middle, and can combine the advantages of both to some extent. Of course , it does not have the full range of advantages either!

And yes, before you ask, the Otter does have a shrouded prop. I know it's a multi wing fan blade in there, but technically it's a shrouded prop.

We all know fans are faster, just look at the race results - right?

Wrong. That depends on how you define fast. Races are typically on tight little courses with lots of bends, and cornering is all about static thrust. They have few long straights and so race winning craft have lots of static thrust. They don't need moving thrust to win. So race winning craft are not speed record craft, as Guy Martin found out. We define fast as in straight line.

Size is everything.

Whether it's a prop, a fan or a shrouded prop one thing holds true, hp for hp, it'll create more static thrust if it's bigger. The ducted fan makes the most, then the shrouded prop, then the prop. But don't forget about the duct length rule, it has to be the same as the diameter. So if you want a 1.5m ducted fan, it must be 1.5m long. Not very practical!

Actually we haven't used true ducted fans since the seventies, they are somewhat in between ducted fans and shrouded props really. So a current duct of maybe 1.1m diameter but maybe 0.6m long actually behaves somewhere nearer to a prop than a duct, and doesn't get the hoped for thrust benefit.

Now we have to talk about moving thrust !

As we said, slow exit air gives the best thrust hp for hp. But what if the exit air leaves the fan at the same speed as the crafts forward speed, surely that can't be making any thrust can it??? Essentially you just took the air aboard the craft and then sort of left it behind rather than blasted it out behind you.

That's absolutely true. If your fan sends air out the back at, say, 80mph then you can't go any faster than that - even if you have no drag at all. That's the problem Guy Martin had. His fan chucked air out not much faster than 85mph. So no matter what he did, that was it. And, of course this doesn't happen all of a sudden, as the craft speeds up the thrust reduces slowly from the static thrust value until eventually there's no thrust left. Of course the maximum speed happens a bit before that when the increasing drag equals the reducing thrust.

So - the ducted fan has a greater static thrust but the lowest exit air speed. That means its thrust reduces fastest. The prop, on the other hand, has the least static thrust but the highest exit air speed so it's thrust reduces least. A prop powered craft can go faster than a fan powered craft. And as usual the shrouded prop sits somewhere in the middle.

What this means is that if you want to design a fast craft you have to design for fast prop/fan exit air speed, and that'll mean smaller fans or preferably an open prop with its built in exit airspeed advantage.

Anything else to be considered?

As we have discovered, a big ducted fan gives the most thrust per hp, so surely it's the best choice for a hovercraft? Perhaps, but we do need to consider other practicalities before we decide what's best. The size and weight of a big duct can have a big impact on craft performance, especially in a side or tail wind. We talked about yaw stability in the first article, recall that if we have a large side profile at the stern it must be balanced by a large side profile at the bows otherwise the craft will shuttlecock in a strong tailwind. Put another way, there's a practical maximum size of duct for our size or craft , once you get above about 1.2m or 1.3m it's getting difficult to balance the yaw stability up. This is why shrouded props become important, gaining some of the advantages of ducted fans but without the bulk.

Once you are looking at fan or prop sizes greater than about 1.5m, even shrouded props cease to be practical and you'll finish up with an open prop due to the size and weight of the shroud.

So what about that speed record ?

From all this discussion you should be getting the idea that a speed record craft should have a specially designed prop. A ducted fan similar to those used in racing will lose thrust too quickly at high speed and that'll limit things. On the other hand, a prop with its highest air exit speed may not produce as much static thrust but it hangs onto what it has longer as the speed increases. On my I old Surveyor I once experimented with a 1.2m open prop in place of the 1.5m shrouded prop you are all familiar with. It had less thrust but went MUCH faster in terms of top speed, using the same engine. It was hugely noticeable when we tested it with the fan and swapped it out to the prop, the craft didn't accelerate or get over hump as well but once the speed was up it just kept getting faster.

So if Guy Martin fancies another go he needs to forget the racing duct - it's too slow! - and build a craft with either a smaller ducted fan or better still an open prop. Of course, since this small ducted fan or prop will produce less static thrust, he'll need lots of power installed in order to get over hump, but once over hump he'll hang onto much more thrust to a much higher speed. He could and should get well over the ton with that set up, and if money (serious money) were no object then 200 mph should be achievable. Yep, that speed record could be smashed into little pieces by a suitably determined team of Engineers.

And of course noise ...

No discussion on fans and props is complete without talking about noise. This again is pretty simple when you boil it down. High tip speed is bad. More blades is bad. But you do need to absorb the power, and you do need to create thrust. So you have to go big. It's no coincidence that the quieter craft have the bigger fans and the quietest craft have the biggest open or shrouded props. And that is why the Otter has a large shrouded prop.

Of course Guy Martin's new craft would be really really noisy! But very fast too.


« Last Edit: Nov 04, 2016, 6:33 pm by Ian Brooks »
Ian Brooks
Gloucester, UK

« Reply #14 on: Oct 10, 2016, 10:25 pm »
 
Tech Corner 2: Off Cushion Stability

Introduction

Following on from the article on on-cushion stability I thought a discussion about off cushion stability would be interesting. As we all know, one if the questions that the Public always ask is 'does it float with the engine off, mister?'. Well, they should, but how well? And would you be able to step off a floating craft onto a quay for example?

Direction

Like on cushion stability, there are different types of stability to think about, in this case only roll and pitch, which are the same directions as before. However, mostly it's only roll we need to think about. If we're worrying about pitch stability off cushion then the craft is probably just a toy!

Intact stability

The new MCA Hovercraft Code specifies the intact off cushion roll stability as a maximum of 10 degrees roll with all the passengers moved as far as possible to one side. This is pretty easy to test with a spirit level, ruler and some willing passengers. Just get all the passengers to lean hard on one side and measure the angle of roll with the spirit level and ruler. You'll h as be to remember your trigonometry from school though! (Sohcahtoa and all that!).

Actually 10 degrees is quite a lot, and you'll be surprised how stable your craft is. Hopefully! And if you're unpleasantly surprised better finding out now than in a force 5.

Swamped stability

The Code also specifies the swamped stability - which is of course the stability when tothe craft is totally full of water (wish I hadn't lost that drain plug!!!).

The requirement is a bit looser - basically it says the craft must "float reasonably level" in order to provide a platform for the passengers to sit on until rescue arrives - someone sitting in a swamped craft but mostly out of the water will last lot longer than someone in the water clinging to the nose of an almost sunk craft, allowing more time for rescue to happen. I've been there, I can tell you that a nice stable floating hull is a great comfort compared to brown murky river Severn water!

Pitch stability


The only reason to talk about pitch stability is in the case of integrated craft or craft of very limited freeboard. The 'ultralight' class of hovercraft (defined in the MCA Code) are allowed to have incredibly low freeboard of just 100mm at the splitter plate. This Club does not consider this acceptable for serious cruising, and if anyone is considering an ultralight we would suggest they look at the limitations that the Code places on thier use - this isn't consistent with anything other than very localised operation from a base or mother craft. We would always recommend the 'light' class of hovercraft for most cruising. In a future article I'll go through the definitions and restrictions of the 'light' and 'ultralight' classes.

In a craft with only 100mm freeboard at the splitter plate, if the pilot moves backwards from the seated position (eg to look at the engine) then there must be enough pitch stability to stop the water entering via the lift air plenum. If this happens you'll be swamped in seconds, and yes, I've seen this happen!

Roll stability.

By thier nature, hovercraft will always carry thier centre of gravity above the waterline when off cushion. This means that given a chance, they would all prefer to float upside down! This is not good! Fortunately it is usually pretty difficult to get them to capsize, because roll stability is built into the design - or should be! I have seen some craft that did not have this, and which would therefore spontaneously roll over when off cushion (fortunately an easily fixed problem).

When floating, if the pilots or passengers move towards the gunwales, thier weight creates a force that tries to roll the craft over. If the craft is to remain stable, then this force must be opposed by another force or the craft will roll over. This is called the restoring force - because it restores stability.

The restoring force is created when during roll some part of the craft is submerged, displacing water and providing a buoyancy up-force to counteract the passengers down-force. The further out from the craft centreline this displacement is, the better as the upwards force creates a larger rolling 'moment' (or turning force).

Dry or wet plenum?

With a dry plenum and a hull with planing surfaces all round, as the weight moves to the side, more and more of the hull is forced into the water, creating the desired restoring force and resulting in smaller roll angle. For this type of hull, you can easily stand on the gunwales with very little roll.

In contrast, a wet plenum craft displaces much less water and creates much less restoring force. Its a bit like sailing in a bath - it would rather roll over. For this reason, there should be additional buoyancy material (eg foam) placed in the plenum so that it gets forced into the water as the craft rolls. Without this it may be 'critically unstable' - that is, it might just roll over without provocation.

In summary

So there you go, basically if everything goes bent your craft should float in a nice stable way when off cushion, even if there's a hole in the hull and it fills with water, or even if upside down. If you have any doubts, ask your manufacturer for their test report, or you can do a simple test yourself  to check its all ok, preferably in nice shallow water in a safe area!

« Last Edit: Nov 04, 2016, 6:36 pm by Ian Brooks »
Ian Brooks
Gloucester, UK

« Reply #13 on: Sep 27, 2016, 4:18 pm »
 
Just thinking on what Ian said on the skirts and stability of the craft.  I would like to say one of the main things the hovercraft ploughs in on my experience is the height of the thrust duct above the craft when you power up the air thrust from the back of the duct makes leveridge and forces the craft in a downward direction causing the craft to plough in.  This would be more so as Ian stated on down wind where it increases the force therefore forcing the front to plough in if conditions are not right.  To give you an example if you move the thrust duct to one extreme side of the craft instead of being in the centre that will cause the craft to be unstable and turn in circles.  So it all comes in to what Ian is saying stability of the craft the divider flap, good designed skirts and opening holes on the planning surface for the skirts to help give better pressure, one of the things that I found that works (it is not a new idea) I fitted a elevator above the rudders to give me more stability.  Hope this helps

Tom

« Reply #12 on: Sep 25, 2016, 8:08 am »
 
Had a flash of you driving along in a Micky Mouse hat!  :o :o What do you mean?  ;)
Dam you spell checker.
Rudder ears. Pmsl.

« Reply #11 on: Sep 24, 2016, 8:49 pm »
 
Our pro performance calculator will show the range of centre of lift locations (for divider craft ) AND the actual centre of lift.gravity for a non-divider cushion (works for segments,. bag or whatever).  Well worth it as it clearly shows the the safe load position limits for your craft.

« Reply #10 on: Sep 24, 2016, 7:12 pm »
 
I tell my pax that if I suddenly get friendly by moving backwards they better do the same or we might both get wet ;-) That's dynamic CofG in action !

« Reply #9 on: Sep 24, 2016, 4:48 pm »
 
Thanks Ian. As ever delightfully succinct.
My take about 6.5 years ago was to design / make a large craft which still banks!
THIS I have achieved---- but it means in practice that at low speeds, you need to be wary of how you drive.
One aspect of KingFisher which I did not particularly expect was the change in how the craft handles once forward speed is gained. She gradually "tightens up" so that during a slight change of direction (OK- altered yaw!), then the craft banks over similar to a light plane does when using ailerons. I believe the windward side gains more aerodynamic lift than the down wind side, and I get a pleasing bank without moving one of my bushy eyebrows.
Once i achieve a decent cruise, the craft will bank (and thus turn) using the slightest of movements, so that on smooth water The rudder can initiate the banking, and really tight turns can be undertaken. Its pleasing to watch (and video) the wake.
I could alter the skirt design but it actually feels super, a bit like riding on a jumbo, but using weight shift to fly it!


Ian is definitely correct when he urges caution regarding skirt design to avoid instability.
IF I was designing today, i perhaps would do the same as I did, ie self design and place fingers firmly inside hearing organ.
(Why would we do that), because i wanted to see if it could be done by a non aeronautical student. It can (just) but boy you can suffer for reckless enthusiasm!😜   


Slight admission is that Ian kindly designed my divider skirt to go with a finger skirted craft. Now that HAS helped.


One aspect is the gloopie goo drag factor, which can easily turn all skirt design to an upturned hull! Ensuring sufficient lubrication is always essential to avoid getting grabbed by your fingers!🖐


😜
Memories are BETTER than Dreams---"Capn" FLINT

« Reply #8 on: Sep 24, 2016, 2:31 pm »
 

 
 Rubber ears help with yaw .
 


Had a flash of you driving along in a Micky Mouse hat!  :o :o What do you mean?  ;)

« Reply #7 on: Sep 24, 2016, 11:16 am »
 
The Turd is now low pressure segmented skirt with enlarged air holes.
In one trip on the Mersey within 5 minutes I knew it was a better setup for my craft. Rubber ears help with yaw and moveable ballast for pitch. I still have a way to go but it's a far better craft now than when it was first built in the 1990's.
Snippets of knowledge are easier for me to digest as I find it difficult to concentrate on long complex articles. I new the basics but Ian has filled in some of the gaps.
I look forward to more snippets.
Well done Ian and thankyou for taking the time to do it.

« Reply #6 on: Sep 24, 2016, 10:09 am »
 
Surely this makes no allowance for a dynamic C of G,  Ian ?

Good point! By dynamic CofG we mean moving things about in the craft to actively put the CofG over the centre of lift. This could be fuel, water or people, often the pilot simply moving about. For example , in craft with a tendency to plough but no divider we see pilots moving their weight backwards when flying downwind to counteract the loss of aerodynamic lift on the bows, or pilots shifting right or left to correct the roll trim. This all works well on small craft, for larger craft we begin to need other ways to achieve the same thing. In very large craft skirt shift mechanisms are used for similar purpose, but instead of moving the CogG, they move the centre of lift. However it is done, the key point is there must be some way to match the CofG and CofL, otherwise the craft will be unstable.
Ian Brooks
Gloucester, UK

« Reply #5 on: Sep 24, 2016, 7:43 am »
 
Both informative and restorative  :-\  there was info in there that I forgot I knew if you know what I mean. Keep em coming Ian, well done.
National Sarcasm Society - like we need your support
http://www.patsure.com

« Reply #4 on: Sep 24, 2016, 7:19 am »
 
Keep the mini articles coming please Ian - I need all the help I can get! :o 8)

« Reply #3 on: Sep 24, 2016, 12:22 am »
 
Thanks Ian. Might be old news to old hands but, very informative to novices. especially remote ones, like myself.  8)

« Reply #2 on: Sep 24, 2016, 12:22 am »
 
Surely this makes no allowance for a dynamic C of G,  Ian ?

« Reply #1 on: Sep 23, 2016, 11:10 pm »
 
Tech Corner 1: On Cushion Stability

I thought I might start a series of random technical mini-articles on subjects that happen to jump to the fore. The first one is here! If I get good feedback I'll keep going

On Cushion Stability


It seems obvious that a hovercraft should be stable when on cushion (hovering) but we probably don't think very much about it, despite the fact that there are very big differences between craft types in this respect.

So, what is stability, anyway? We say that a system is stable when a disturbance is countered by a 'restoring force'. All this means is, if the craft nose goes down, for example, then there are arrangements made to 'push back' - like when a divider skirt is fitted. So, if the craft is to be stable we have to design a system that provides a restoring force in response to any unwanted motion. Then it will be stable.

Before we can talk any more about stability, we need to define the key directions,ie yaw, pitch and roll. Yaw is basically spinning the craft as though it were turning. In pitch, the craft bows go up or down, with the stern doing the opposite, and in roll the craft, well, rolls side to side.

Pitch stability

Most of us are familiar with plough-in; when the nose goes down so far that the hull contacts the water and the pilot can sometimes be ejected. This is an example of bad pitch stability, actually the craft has become critically unstable in pitch. The cause of plough in is well established, water forces on the bow skirt pull the bows down, and with nothing to stop it this effect continues until all control is lost. If this effect is to be prevented, as we said earlier, we have to provide a restoring force, and that's exactly what a divider skirt does. Essentially a well designed divider provides good pitch stability, and that's why it works.

It's well known that some craft will have a tendency to plough in when flying down wind. This is because the aerodynamic lift on the bows is reduced when going down wind - effectively forcing the bow down, and in the absence of a system like a skirt divider which can provide a restoring force, the pitch stability margin is reduced making plough in more likely.

Roll stability.


Roll stability is less well known, but is experienced by us all every time we're out. Ever wondered why some craft can have side by side seating , whilst others need to have it in the centre? The answer is roll stability.

On cushion roll stability comes from the skirt system. They are all (or should be!) designed to give roll stability, but some are better than others. The sev style skirt, for example, is designed to deform when the craft rolls, pushing the contact point further out and this is what creates the restoring force and gives good roll stability. It's known as a 'low pressure deformable skirt' for that reason.

The segment skirt is often designed with a 45 degree angle between the skirt and the ground, and the idea is that as the craft rolls, the skirt contacts the ground progressively further out having the same effect. However, it has to roll a long way before any serious restoring force is created and this leads to lower roll stability.

One other skirt system that has pretty much gone out of fashion is the high pressure bag. This type of skirt is not deformable like the low pressure deformable skirt, and has no 45 degree angle like a segment skirt, so it must create roll stability another way. It does so by flattening the bottom of the bag against or into the surface. For this to work, the bag needs to be at high pressure - which causes other issues! A high pressure bag is under stress and can fail catastrophically, whilst a low pressure skirt will not do so.

So now it should be apparent why Sevs style craft, fitted with low pressure deformable skirts, allow the use of side by side seating.

The other aspect of roll stability is operating in side-slip, or more properly "in yaw". The danger here is that the craft could try to roll over as the wave forces act on the bottom of the skirt trying to roll the craft over. The only thing resisting this is the roll stability. For any craft at a given angle of yaw there is a safe maximum speed that will not result in the craft rolling over. As the angle increases, so that the safe speed decreases, meaning that as you side slip (yaw) more and more, you must slow down to stay safe.

Yaw stability


Yaw stability basically refers to the ease of keeping the craft heading in the direction (angle of yaw) that the pilot desires. The main thing that will disturb yaw is the wind, especially tail winds. Get a strong enough wind, and most craft will "shuttlecock", or spin round to face the wind. This is made worse by large ducts. 

To control yaw, you need to minimise the tendency of the wind to spin the craft. This is done by minimising the side area of the duct, but more critically by matching the duct area to a slightly smaller side-al area at the front of the craft, such as the windscreen or coamings. What we are trying to achieve is to make the craft turn slightly into a side wind but not to react to a tail wind. This is done by matching these areas.

In addition, you should make sure that the maximum rudder "authority" is provided. Thus just means that turning the rudders gives the largest possible turning force , and is usually achieved by fitting lots of smaller rudders rather than two larger rudders.

Getting this right is sometimes quite problematical. It's easier in smaller craft, which are less affected by the wind, and more difficult in larger craft.

Overall


It should by now be apparent that good on cushion stability in either pitch, yaw or roll is not an accident and must be designed in carefully. These subjects are all covered in the new MCA hovercraft code so if you are looking to buy a craft, ask about on cushion stability. In particular, you should be offered information on the safe speed at any angle of yaw.

So feel free to comment, if we get good response I'll occasionally add another mini article on a technical aspect of hovercraft that happens to grab my fancy at the time - or that you ask for
« Last Edit: Nov 04, 2016, 6:35 pm by Ian Brooks »
Ian Brooks
Gloucester, UK