Flow 3.0 - Is it good?

[dakota4ce]

Yeah as you know a small movement in the actuator mount can have a large effect on the deployment, looks like on your small tabs about an inch of placement difference yielded 18 degrees of change.
Through a lot of trial and error on placement for both ends i was able to get the extension and retraction that I wanted with the 2.5" actuator.
It would have been easier with the 4.5" version but I wanted to give the bennetts a try and they don't have the long throw versions.

Would be interesting to see the software linked up to the 2.25 and a GSA plate. I think you need to do this!

If you can get auto level, launch, and good surf operation on the lenco 2.25s you would crack the code. All assuming the tabs don’t rip out of the glass when autoleveling.

I would also wonder if those little guys have the stink to move those big plates under pressure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SONIC]

Would be interesting to see the software linked up to the 2.25 and a GSA plate. I think you need to do this!

If you can get auto level, launch, and good surf operation on the lenco 2.25s you would crack the code. All assuming the tabs don’t rip out of the glass when autoleveling.

I would also wonder if those little guys have the stink to move those big plates under pressure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah the auto leveling may be an issue.
Instead of doing the logical and intelligent thing and deploying the correct tab slowly until the boat is level for some unknowable reason they programmed it to deploy to 40% immediately and then move from there to set the level.
At 30mph taking a gsa from 0-40% is probably not a good idea.

It can be turned off though.
I don't find it overly useful anyway as its not sensitive enough, it lets me ride around at +/- 1.5 degrees without making any changes. I prefer to just fill the ballast on the off side so it rides level.

[2in2out]

Yaw. It makes yaw. We are looking for yaw.

Delayed convergence is a somewhat mythical concept written in a brilliant Malibu Patent.

The small plate on 3.0 adds a yaw moment. That’s what I was clarifying.

My comment about it being mythical is because their patent uses that term, but applies to everything. It really is a brilliant patent but is far too broad. But it’s too late for that critique, though.

I am going to patent accelerated convergence and sue them.

The GSA tab accessory creates a minimal yaw moment and delay in convergence through Bernoulli's Principle and Newton's 2nd law of motion in that the flow of water in the vanes increases in pressure and net velocity disrupting the laminar flow of the slip line of the hull creating delay in the convergence of the water. Imagine running a high volume pump and nozzle under the rear hull of your boat directed away from the surf side. Running a hose underwater doesn't create cavitation, whereas a tab penetrating the surface and disrupting surface tension does. The force of the volume of water emanating from the nozzle would alter the slip line subsurface, changing its trajectory creating a low pressure area where static water and the vectored water under pressure occur. Convergence shifts with less disruption to surface tension and amplified action.

Suck gates are more torturous in that they disrupt the surface tension and laminar flow so greatly that eddies and vortices introduce air into the slip line and convergence reducing the overall density of the wave, and as the Wake9 2021 Makai video shows, decreases the firmness of the wave. I would call this a forced convergence, because you're forcing the boat to disrupt its slip line to create a low pressure area for the opposing convergence to fill.

My concern with the Flow 3.0 tab is that it is to disruptive to the laminar flow of the slip line that it is introducing cavitation reducing wave density. I think the GSA design applied correctly on tab in which you could modulate the depth the chutes carve and redirect away from the slip line could give much greater wave adjustment.

The displacement created by a yawed hull is important in that it creates a larger low pressure area that increase in wave amplitude and the needs of surface tension are forced to react with a bigger wave. But if you introduce more yaw than can be absorbed by the slip line, laminar flow will be disrupted introducing cavitation and air induction at the surface. Add roll into the direction of yaw, and the laminar flow and resulting low pressure area are too subsurface for surface wave amplitude formation. One way to modulate yaw would be to include the tracking vanes and rudder into a complex system to force more yaw of the hull, but I have to think that beyond a certain percentage of yaw, significant drag would result and disruption of propulsive force of the prop.

I built a similar system, and short throw wouldn't work.

The problem I see with ShoeBoxes set up is that the GSA like addition to the tabs forces water down and away from the subsurface convergence point as the down angle of the tabs is increased. An articulation point just forward of the vanes allowing them to ride parallel to the slip line, but subsurface may allow for better redirection at steeper tab angles. I wonder if putting a break and hinge forward of the GSA vanes and a gas strut for leveling of the GSA would keep it close to level but subsurface.

This is all great discussion. As a disclaimer, I have no engineering training and only minimal understanding of fluid dynamics. Everything I said I pulled out my arse to describe the vague and incomplete concepts of this whole thing out of my head. I understand why the patent stated "mythical".

[2in2out]

Would be interesting to see the software linked up to the 2.25 and a GSA plate. I think you need to do this!

If you can get auto level, launch, and good surf operation on the lenco 2.25s you would crack the code. All assuming the tabs don’t rip out of the glass when autoleveling.

I would also wonder if those little guys have the stink to move those big plates under pressure.

Yeah the auto leveling may be an issue.
Instead of doing the logical and intelligent thing and deploying the correct tab slowly until the boat is level for some unknowable reason they programmed it to deploy to 40% immediately and then move from there to set the level.
At 30mph taking a gsa from 0-40% is probably not a good idea.

It can be turned off though.
I don't find it overly useful anyway as its not sensitive enough, it lets me ride around at +/- 1.5 degrees without making any changes. I prefer to just fill the ballast on the off side so it rides level.

I had concerns about this when I investigated the GSA system for my Sanger 215SX. Cruising without trim tabs would be untenable, and I was afraid deployment at speed would rip the tabs off. I asked GSA what they could do to accommodate both functions, and the answer was basically you gotta give to get. That wasn't suitable to me.

I contemplated a design that would had slots cut out of the trim tabs for the GSA vertical vanes and a cam actuator to raise the GSA vane box so that the bottom plate would flush with the trim tab plate at cruise speeds, and drop at surf speeds.

Since the trim tab adjustment on the Sanger was 30 degrees max, the GSA wouldn't be driven to a steep angle like Shoeboxes set-up.

[Shoebox]

The GSA tab accessory creates a minimal yaw moment and delay in convergence through Bernoulli's Principle and Newton's 2nd law of motion in that the flow of water in the vanes increases in pressure and net velocity disrupting the laminar flow of the slip line of the hull creating delay in the convergence of the water. Imagine running a high volume pump and nozzle under the rear hull of your boat directed away from the surf side. Running a hose underwater doesn't create cavitation, whereas a tab penetrating the surface and disrupting surface tension does. The force of the volume of water emanating from the nozzle would alter the slip line subsurface, changing its trajectory creating a low pressure area where static water and the vectored water under pressure occur. Convergence shifts with less disruption to surface tension and amplified action.

Suck gates are more torturous in that they disrupt the surface tension and laminar flow so greatly that eddies and vortices introduce air into the slip line and convergence reducing the overall density of the wave, and as the Wake9 2021 Makai video shows, decreases the firmness of the wave. I would call this a forced convergence, because you're forcing the boat to disrupt its slip line to create a low pressure area for the opposing convergence to fill.

My concern with the Flow 3.0 tab is that it is to disruptive to the laminar flow of the slip line that it is introducing cavitation reducing wave density. I think the GSA design applied correctly on tab in which you could modulate the depth the chutes carve and redirect away from the slip line could give much greater wave adjustment.

The displacement created by a yawed hull is important in that it creates a larger low pressure area that increase in wave amplitude and the needs of surface tension are forced to react with a bigger wave. But if you introduce more yaw than can be absorbed by the slip line, laminar flow will be disrupted introducing cavitation and air induction at the surface. Add roll into the direction of yaw, and the laminar flow and resulting low pressure area are too subsurface for surface wave amplitude formation. One way to modulate yaw would be to include the tracking vanes and rudder into a complex system to force more yaw of the hull, but I have to think that beyond a certain percentage of yaw, significant drag would result and disruption of propulsive force of the prop.



The problem I see with ShoeBoxes set up is that the GSA like addition to the tabs forces water down and away from the subsurface convergence point as the down angle of the tabs is increased. An articulation point just forward of the vanes allowing them to ride parallel to the slip line, but subsurface may allow for better redirection at steeper tab angles. I wonder if putting a break and hinge forward of the GSA vanes and a gas strut for leveling of the GSA would keep it close to level but subsurface.

This is all great discussion. As a disclaimer, I have no engineering training and only minimal understanding of fluid dynamics. Everything I said I pulled out my arse to describe the vague and incomplete concepts of this whole thing out of my head. I understand why the patent stated "mythical".

My tabs were an exact copy of GSA tabs. While your thought makes sense in theory, GSA's original tabs had a hinge forward of the vanes, with a turnbuckle for adjustability. They don't make them that way anymore, I'd imagine for good reason.

[Shoebox]

Since the trim tab adjustment on the Sanger was 30 degrees max, the GSA wouldn't be driven to a steep angle like Shoeboxes set-up.

Mine only went to 18°, and I had adjustability to do less.

[dakota4ce]

Well, GSA TABS do seem to create yaw as observed from driving the boat and how clean the waves end up.

Or.....
Maybe they don’t.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Shoebox]

Well, GSA TABS do seem to create yaw as observed from driving the boat and how clean the waves end up.

Or.....
Maybe they don’t.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You mean like this?

[dakota4ce]

You mean like this?

That seems clean!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dakota4ce]

To revisit the OP question: Flow 3.0, is it good?

Yes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk