|
|
|
POWER TO WEIGHT AND ALL THAT Barry Greenwood Barry.Greenwood@BTinternet.com One of the interesting offshoots from having my engines overhauled last year was the performance data supplied from the dynamometer engine testing. This was performed after the engines were rebuilt and tested the engines at all speed ranges and allowed them to be run-in subsequent to being refitted in the boat. It also gave me peace of mind that I would not have to remove them again to rectify a fault occurring in the first few hours of running.On test, the engines were run at progressively increasing engine speeds and the power output was recorded from the dynamometer. This was proportional to the load being applied and was recorded as brake horsepower (bhp) against revs. Per minute (rpm). The gearboxes were not fitted at this stage. The maximum-recorded power was 196bhp at 2600rpm. An allowance of about 4% must be allowed for transmission losses to give a more accurate figure when fitted in the boat. This would bring the maximum power output available down to 188shp (shaft horsepower). From this engine data some interesting speed calculations can be made. In his book on naval architecture, K. Barnaby uses the formula: V=K Ö BHP/D where V = boat speed in knots, K = constant, Bhp = engine power (in this case shp), D = displacement in tons. From tank testing and previously published data on series C hulls, K = 3.5 (I would not expect this to alter by more than a point or two for the entire Moonraker range.) The following graph is useful to determine power output at all engine speed ranges. It is based on actual data recorded from the port engine, a Perkins T6354 175hp. The starboard engine gave virtually identical results.
From this graph and using the above, one can build
a table of theoretical boat speeds against varying displacement and power.
It can be seen that more than a knot can be lost
by the addition of one ton. This could be the difference between full and empty fuel and
water tanks and number of crew, etc. Our own boat, Golden Sands, is always heavier at the
start of our annual holiday with extra supplies, food, clothes, etc. (and if we go to
France, with beer, by the end of the holiday also.) If your boat has been constantly
afloat, it may also have taken up a certain amount of water through the gelcoat. In one
case I heard about up to half a ton was removed during osmosis treatment.
The table of speeds is theoretical and is very dependent on the state of your antifouling, it also assumes the boat is fitted with the correct propeller, but you may be able to check your own boat against recorded boat speeds (assuming the log has been calibrated recently). For the record, I fitted new four-blade propellers, size 16x13 with a blade area ratio of 0.87. Earlier this year and during trials with clean antifouling the boat achieved 20.3kts at 2350rpm with full fuel tank, half-full water tank and two crew. From the table this would suggest power developed of 250shp and all up weight of about 7.5 tons. Later in the year when slime had built up we could only achieve 18.8kts. It can be seen from the graph that there are potentially another 100bhp available in the final 200rpm. We intend to have the pitch reduced on our propellers next time the boat is out of the water, to try and achieve the maximum engine rpm and I shall report any difference this makes to the performance. I would be pleased to receive performance data from other members' boats and would publish the results in due course. Perhaps next time your boat is out of the water you might make a note of the prop sizes, usually stamped on the hub.
|