Fuel Efficiency: Smooth Plate Hull vs Sheet w/Formed Ribs

General boating discussion
IN2DEEP
WON Super Star Donator '08, '09, '10, '11
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:07 pm
16
Location: So. Calif.

Fuel Efficiency: Smooth Plate Hull vs Sheet w/Formed Ribs

#1

Post by IN2DEEP »

Are aluminum hulls that are built using smooth plate alloy more fuel efficient than hulls built using thinner sheet that form ribs in the surface to increase it's stiffness?

The thinner sheet (tinnies) with formed in ribbing are lighter, but do they have more drag while at cruise speeds compared to hulls that are smooth?

Plate alloy hulls would be heavier, but will the smooth surface make them more efficient over a lighter hull with surface ribs with similar configurations?

Thanks for any replies

PS: Be easy on my rig. Shes not a spring chicken anymore! (19 yrs. old)

Image

Image

Image
Image
1989 22' Walkaround Cuddy Bayrunner
2001 115 Merc. 4 stroke/1988 9.9 Yamaha 4 stroke kicker
User avatar
Jay Perrotta
Sponsor/Donator
Posts: 376
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:27 am
16
Your location: Freeport, Maine, USA
Location: Freeport, Maine, USA

#2

Post by Jay Perrotta »

I'm not sure.

The ribs are definitely "drag" but may also have the effect of breaking surface tension.

The water passing over the bottom is both going fore to aft and also moving from center to edge.

In breaking the movement from center to edge and addding air you may well be reducing drag. Hard to tell without testing - would just be an opinion!

I like your boat!
Jay Perrotta
Bullshipper
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:53 pm
16
Location: Mexico

#3

Post by Bullshipper »

Strakes catching water and bubbles forced up from the keel theoreticly create more lift and a thicker bubble or air layer between the hull and the moving water reducing laminar flow friction.

But the ribs do increase the wetted surface area so depending on the amount, this could be a toss up.

The primary benifit of the ribs also allow for thinner material which cuts weight, widens the centers for fewr stringers, which save on material and labor.

I know a couple of guys who have twin 50 hp motors on a 22' Baja and that they burn very little gas going offshore, but the deadrise on their hull is also prettly flat at the transom, so a head to head comparision against a plate alloy boat is not to comparable as they get a pretty harsh ride in the chop.
AlloyToy
Donator '08 '09 '10
Posts: 2433
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:55 am
16
Your location: Mass
Location: MA & RI

#4

Post by AlloyToy »

in2deep, any pics of that little cabin? Looks interesting.......

I like the looks of the boat!!
IN2DEEP
WON Super Star Donator '08, '09, '10, '11
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:07 pm
16
Location: So. Calif.

#5

Post by IN2DEEP »

AlloyTroy,
I'll have some pictures of the other parts of the boat in a few weeks in the "About Your Boat" section
Need to clean out all my stuff out of the cabin to make it picture presentable :wink:

Scott
Image
1989 22' Walkaround Cuddy Bayrunner
2001 115 Merc. 4 stroke/1988 9.9 Yamaha 4 stroke kicker
mojomizer
Contributor/Donator '08
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 4:38 pm
16
Location: Orange County

#6

Post by mojomizer »

Scott post your fuel mileage without the neener neener. That hull is how old......... looks clean. So that is the infamous Die Hard?????? Post a pic in the Meet and greet section. Talk to you soon.

Mark
Mark
2325 WA PACIFICSKIFF
User avatar
JETTYWOLF
Contributor/donator/Location Nazi
Posts: 6074
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:11 pm
16
Your location: JACKSONVILLE FL USA
Location: Tree-hugger, USA...they call it FLA.

#7

Post by JETTYWOLF »

Just a shot in the dark, but since the whole boat is one rib after another, it would seem to me that the reason is strengthening period.

If the ride gets better over the bottom pieces because of it, or the mileage is better, is just a benefit of the design and materials used to create a light weight boat with stronger stiffened pieces, out of neccesity.

But what the hell do I know...I'm over the top happy with my my mileage.
Ironwoodtuna
Donator '09 '10
Posts: 510
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:27 pm
16
Your location: NY
Location: Montauk, NY

#8

Post by Ironwoodtuna »

In2deep,

Looking at your bottom chines makes me think that the rounded edged to the keel side would tend to hold more air bubbles than most hard chines. That said, it should help your speed and economy. But I don't think for a boat that size with its weight it really matters a whole lot. You gotta be very economical, so if you had hard chines instead of rounded it may be less effective. Cool looking little fisherman you have there. Mty
ImageImage"IRONWOODTUNA" the Alloy Sportfisherman Battleship!
IN2DEEP
WON Super Star Donator '08, '09, '10, '11
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:07 pm
16
Location: So. Calif.

#9

Post by IN2DEEP »

Thanks for your thoughts and opinions.
This was something that I've always wondered about and never had anyone to ask it to.
I guess what prompted me to ask was the mileage figures that Welder had posted for his rig. Quite impressive if those are average figures and not just "one time I got "

I'm getting 3.0-3.250 nautical MPG's per trip readout on the GPS.
Been doing 42-45 mi. trips on 13-15 gallons.
Usually cruise at 19-20 knots@ 4100-4400 RPM
It probably doesn't help that my rig is not exactly aerodynamic with the hard top and full enclosure, kicker and two extra fuel tanks under the gunnels.

I can't complain because I used to get under 2 MPG's while running a 130HP Yamaha 2-stroke with the smell and noise
Image
1989 22' Walkaround Cuddy Bayrunner
2001 115 Merc. 4 stroke/1988 9.9 Yamaha 4 stroke kicker
Bullshipper
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:53 pm
16
Location: Mexico

#10

Post by Bullshipper »

Your fuel economy should be a lot better than that (on a 22 footer??) IMO. Maybe as much as 2x better.

I am going to make some comments that I hope you will take as helpfull observations.

From the pictures of the underside of your bow it would appear that there are some large dents on the port side that will catch a lot of water. These spoons need to be pushed or pulled out to recreate low drag planning surfaces.

Baja runners are also rough in a head sea chop, so if you are trimming down the bow to compensate this will drastically cut your mileage in any hull and place the bow dents into the water will afftect you even more, like a plow or a brake. You might also consider a fine sand and sealer if her old bottom is getting rougher than slippery.

To run more in a trimmed up position to get more speed at the same rpm consider adding some lenco trim tabs to extend your footprint and get a pair of spring-shock absorber seat to soften the ride. These go for about $110 each.

http://www.tractorpartsinc.com/universa ... 11_ctg.htm

I would guess that weight and motor height and perhaps a different prop might help.

Please consider a membership to sea tow in San Diego so that you can lose the kicker and all the extra gas you are carrying. Plus the boat will ride nice and level without the kicker on one side.

Cut your gear weight down to the essential, especially in the forward cabin. You may be running the motor at an extreme uneffecient angler to trim up if there is too much weight forward, and cabins allways collect more "essential items" over time. So here we are talking toal weight and how you have her balanced with that weight.

Use wet burlap bags instead of a lot of ice to cool your fish, and only put up the forward eisenglass windshield when you need it. The side panels shouldn't affect your speed near as much as the front one.

Blast me if I am wrong, I'm real thick skinned.

BTW, I really like your rig.
Last edited by Bullshipper on Wed May 14, 2008 6:22 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
welder
Site Admin
Posts: 4668
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:51 pm
16
Location: Whitesboro, Texas
Contact:

#11

Post by welder »

Good answer Jeff.

Scott, what does your rig weigh wet ready to fish ?
Lester,
PacificV2325, Honda BF225
2386
IN2DEEP
WON Super Star Donator '08, '09, '10, '11
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:07 pm
16
Location: So. Calif.

#12

Post by IN2DEEP »

Thanks for the reply Bullshipper.
You have a sharp eye spotting the dents on the port bow. Unfortunately, these larger Bayrunners of this vintage don't take kindly to pounding them too hard as you can see.
I've tried to pound them out from the inside but didn't have success so I just left it as is.
I already have Bennett trim tabs that I make a lot of use of to trim the bow down when running up swell and not pound.
I have a Vessel Assist membership and would never have a boat without a kicker on it for safety reasons and I use it often to slow troll for halibut and trout in the freshwater. The weight of the kicker is off-set with the dual batteries on the opposite side
I like to keep my catch cold with frozen two liter bottles and don't carry a lot of weight ice wise.
You are probably right in regards to the forward eisenglass, But I've become accustomed to not having the wind hitting my face so it will stay up.
I do appreciate the advice you have given and will take it into consideration.
I should experiment with some other props. Right now I'm running a 15" pitch and I can get 5400rpm running fairly light.
Next choice would be a 13" pitch and that should get 5800rpm.
Could that make much of a difference?

Glad you like it. I enjoy it very much myself. :D



Welder
I have never weighed it, but it probably weighs more than most other 22' Bayrunners out there by the way it tows. :wink:

Scott
Image
1989 22' Walkaround Cuddy Bayrunner
2001 115 Merc. 4 stroke/1988 9.9 Yamaha 4 stroke kicker
Calloy
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:00 pm
15
Location: SoCal

#13

Post by Calloy »

Hi Scott,

The second edition of Stephen Pollard's book "Boatbuilding with Aluminum" states that strakes are not for additional lift but rather add bottom stiffness and reduce drag by knocking down spray. I'm inclined to think that the additional surface area created by the formed-in strakes on your vessel would result in little drag penalty vs. the upside of lighter weight with greater stiffness for a given bottom sheet thickness. Perhaps these longitudinals help with tracking as well.
IN2DEEP
WON Super Star Donator '08, '09, '10, '11
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:07 pm
16
Location: So. Calif.

#14

Post by IN2DEEP »

Thanks Don,

That's some good info to know!
I think that I just have too much aerodynamic drag and added weight to get super great fuel economy...but I'm dry and comfortable :wink:

Scott
Image
1989 22' Walkaround Cuddy Bayrunner
2001 115 Merc. 4 stroke/1988 9.9 Yamaha 4 stroke kicker
Calloy
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:00 pm
15
Location: SoCal

#15

Post by Calloy »

Image

Here I am showing Scott (In2Deep) how big a Halibut I want to catch.

Scott. I'll slim down so that my aerodynamic/weight drag does not slow us down so much next outing.

I Promise, Don.

P.S. Do you like the fish attractors danglin' from my belt?
IN2DEEP
WON Super Star Donator '08, '09, '10, '11
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:07 pm
16
Location: So. Calif.

#16

Post by IN2DEEP »

OH NO!!! Now you're goin' SUMO on us too???

Yeah Mojo, I'm talking 'bout you

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Image
1989 22' Walkaround Cuddy Bayrunner
2001 115 Merc. 4 stroke/1988 9.9 Yamaha 4 stroke kicker
mojomizer
Contributor/Donator '08
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 4:38 pm
16
Location: Orange County

#17

Post by mojomizer »

Careful buddy posing like that and dangling does not mix in the same sentence. I was kind of picturing Dave saying I lost one that big. :lol:

Mark
Mark
2325 WA PACIFICSKIFF
Calloy
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:00 pm
15
Location: SoCal

#18

Post by Calloy »

SLDave,

Was the one that got away this big? I heard 90lbs maybe, perhaps, possibly!
S L Dave
Donator #1 '08, '09, '10, '11, '12, '13
Posts: 1077
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:43 pm
16
Location: LA/Western NY

#19

Post by S L Dave »

ha ha

Great meeting you Calloy...we will do it again soon.
"Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right."
Image
budzz89
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:51 am
15
Your location: ohio

Re: Fuel Efficiency: Smooth Plate Hull vs Sheet w/Formed Ribs

#20

Post by budzz89 »

[quote="IN2DEEP"]Are aluminum hulls that are built using smooth plate alloy more fuel efficient than hulls built using thinner sheet that form ribs in the surface to increase it's stiffness?

The thinner sheet (tinnies) with formed in ribbing are lighter, but do they have more drag while at cruise speeds compared to hulls that are smooth?

Plate alloy hulls would be heavier, but will the smooth surface make them more efficient over a lighter hull with surface ribs with similar configurations?

Thanks for any replies

PS: Be easy on my rig. Shes not a spring chicken anymore! (19 yrs. old)



it actually a nice protection for the boat as you installed it, but for me i can suggest if you want to add paint

_________________
aluminum plate
djplog
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:47 am
15
Your location: Redding, CA

Re: Fuel Efficiency: Smooth Plate Hull vs Sheet w/Formed Ribs

#21

Post by djplog »

You better watch out, or they might take your worm! I have a 21' Bayrunner Baja with a custom pilot house. Loaded for Albacore it weighs in at about 3300#. With my mid 90's Johnson 90, I get an average of about 2 1/2 to 3 mpg. That includes a 50 mile run out, 4 hrs of trolling, and a 50 mile run back usually in less that ideal conditions. I cruise at about 20 mph on the way out with FAC conditions. Usually come back in at about 12 to 15 mph in chop in the PM.
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic