3 ms·
Would this device be even better if it has the newer efficient propeller design called MX-1 Sharrow Propeller ? https://www.boatus.com/expert-advice/expert-adv
by user20180120 2y ago
Would this device be even better if it has the newer efficient propeller design called MX-1 Sharrow Propeller ?
https://www.boatus.com/expert-advice/expert-advice-archive/2020/august/a-breakthrough-in-propulsion https://www.boatus.com/expert-advice/expert-advice-archive/2...
At the 2020 Miami International Boat Show, Philadelphia-based Sharrow Marine introduced the culmination of a seven-year research and development project called the MX-1 Sharrow Propeller. Unlike every prop that's come before it, rather than blades, the MX-1 has loops of metal attached to the hub.
How does this change the dynamic? In a nutshell, much of a prop's inefficiency can be blamed on the blade tips, where vortices and cavitation (commonly called tip vortex cavitation, or TVC) form, creating turbulence and sapping efficiency. Simply put, the loops on a Sharrow have no tips. The net result is an efficiency gain of between 9% and 15%. But just as important, eliminating the cavitation vastly reduces vibrations and noise and makes for a smoother, quieter boat ride.
Company president Greg Sharrow tells us that the development of the MX-1 can be credited to music videos.
"I was trying to solve the problem of reducing unwanted noise from drones while filming live music productions," he says. "I've always thought it would be cool to use a drone to get cameras closer to subjects and film them from onstage, but you can't use drones for music broadcasts because they're too noisy. I knew that most of the noise comes from the blade tips and is caused, in part, by tip vortices. So, I'd have to find a way to eliminate them."
- Chrupiter 2y agoWould it be a good idea to try on wind turbines?
- EnigmaFlare 2y agoUtility scale wind turbines are already about 50% efficient which is close to the theoretical limit of 59% (Betz limit). The loopy blades would be more expensive to manufacture and transport so there's a trade-off and it's not obvious that efficiency would win.
- AlexandrB 2y agoGood question! Boat motors spin a lot faster than the "Underwater bicycle" propeller would so perhaps it's not as beneficial here, but would be interesting to try.
- mrcartmeneses 2y agoIs that a press release?
- dzhiurgis 2y agokeep an eye on https://www.youtube.com/@rctestflight https://www.youtube.com/@rctestflight - they are doing 3d printed prop benchmark/competition and he already tested design you mentioned
- nurple 2y agoI think for water, what you really want is to _breed_ cavitation, but in a way where the jets created by bubble collapse are arranged to face opposite your desired direction of motion. Kind of like Astrophage.
- samplatt 2y agoCavitation for motorised propellors is to be avoided at all cost... a lot of engineering exists to do exactly this. Cavitation is a destructive force and eats away at the edge & surface of the prop blades, making it VERY inefficient.