Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-22-2010, 03:25 PM   #21
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

I remember from my flying days w ultralights that a stopped propeller produced far less drag than a rotating prop. Ask any motorized glider pilot. But as Marin says the the props on a boat are way different. The ratio of the disc area (circumference) or blade arc diameter compared to the blade area of all the blades is what makes it a bad comparison. The blade area of the aircraft prop is probably 10 or 15%. The blade area of a typical 3 blade boat prop is around 50% and a 4 blade is about 70%. Air being compressible and water not adds to the difference I'm sure. Something that may be favorable to running w one is the fact that the running engine won't be as underloaded as w both running. timjet, I would check w the engine manufacturer about proper loading * * *....or consider converting to single engine.
__________________
Advertisement

Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2010, 05:18 PM   #22
Guru
 
timjet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,905
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

John,Shutting one engine down did not increase the rpm on the remaining engine. Remaining engine remained at 1300 rpm with no throttle adjustment, speed dropped 1.2 knots after rudder correction. However though rpm remained constant at 1300 I believe fuel flow did increase as Jeff mentioned due to the higher load. IOW for the engine to maintain a constant rpm the flow flow had to increase to compensate for the increased load otherwise I would have seem a slight decrease in rpm.


I don't believe the prop whether stopped or allowed to free wheel makes a big difference in this case. I think as I asserted above that the power to weight ratio has a much bigger impact on fuel efficiency especially when operating a twin engine planning hull boat single engine.


Consider the fact that a twin displacement hull boat's engines are selected to power the boat efficiently on both engines running at probably 75% power. Same for a planning hull boat but at planning speeds. If you attempt to operate the displacement hull boat single engine, the engine must produce close to it's maximum power to move the boat at displacement speeds if even it can. Now looking at fuel consumption curves will show a huge increase in fuel flow above 75% that probably in some cases would negate the advantage of operating single engine.
This is not so on the planning hull boat. My engines produce enough power to plane the boat, but can easily power the boat to displacement hull speeds on one engine. At 1300 rpm I'm guessing I'm asking only 50% of the engines available power realizing a*significant*fuel savings and achieving close to displacement hull speeds.
__________________

timjet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2010, 09:02 PM   #23
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Why would shutting down one engine cause the other to increase rpm????It should DECREASE as it can't maintain the speed attained w both running because the boat will be powered w approximately half the power/thrust. With the boat slowing down the load will obviously be slightly increased on the remaining engine but only because the slipstream decreased. So * *...if you don't increase throttle fuel consumption on the remaining engine will decrease specifically because the throttle remained the same and the rpm reduced. I know you said the rpm stayed the same so the rpm lost was obviously less than what you can read on the tach. The only way you're going to get an increase in fuel fuel consumption is to increase throttle or increase rpm or both.Most displacement boats don't cruise at hull speed. They cruise at 85 - 90% of hull speed and if you found a twin engined full displacement boat that could achieve hull speed w onlt one engine it would be ridiculously over powered.


I just thought about what I just said and I don't think you wanted to hear any of it. What you want to know is will cruising at 8.3 knots w one engine be more fuel efficient than cruising at 8.3 knots w both engines. I'd lay money on both engines but as you indicated earlier only a good fuel flow meter will tell. Or as you also indicated earlier finding the results of someone else's experiment. Please post whatever you find.


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Friday 22nd of October 2010 09:18:48 PM
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2010, 09:26 PM   #24
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:

Why would shutting down one engine cause the other to increase rpm????It should DECREASE as it can't maintain the speed attained w both running because the boat will be powered w approximately half the power/thrust.
Why would the rpm change at all (on its own)?* Last year when I inadvertently let an engine get a slug of air during a fuel transfer (due to my forgetting about the fuel system setup) the engine died when I was on the aft deck doing something.* My wife was running the boat and she sent one of our guests back to get me.

When I entered the cabin she had pulled the power lever of the dead engine back to idle*and put its shifter in neutral.* However she had not touched the controls of the engine that was still running.* I looked at the tachs and the engine that was running was at exactly the same rpm it had been when I turned the helm over to her earlier--- 1650 rpm.

The boat had*slowed down of course since some of the thrust was gone and there was drag from the unpowered prop.* But the engine that was still operating kept operating at the same rpm it had been at before.

If we'd wanted to maintain the same boat speed after the engine died we'd obviously have had to add power to make up for the loss of thrust and overcome the drag of the unpowered prop.* But when the one engine died all that happened was the boat slowed down to the speed it wanted to go with the thrust from the one prop at 1650 rpm.

*


-- Edited by Marin on Friday 22nd of October 2010 09:29:07 PM
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 07:52 AM   #25
Guru
 
timjet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,905
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:

Why would shutting down one engine cause the other to increase rpm????

*

Please post whatever you find.

-- Edited by nomadwilly on Friday 22nd of October 2010 09:18:48 PM
*
Quote:

Quote:

Eric and Marin,


Thanks for sticking with me on this. I found this reply to a similar question on another forum. I can't speak to it's*accuracy*but I think you might be interested.


When you shut one engine down you did notice that the speed dropped but you could not know that the govenor on the remaining engine increased the fuel load to make up for the increased loading without your intervention. Diesels adjust their fuel use for loading without 'consulting' their owners through the efforts of the govenor.

My words: " I also found that cruising at low planning hull speeds did not improve economy significantly" -

again you are basing this on a chart but using your numbers here the difference is 1.69/1.26 = 34% - that is a sigificant number to many folks.

In reality I think you will find that the difference in fuel burn per mile between about 7 knots and 17 knots will be more like 2:1. The best advantage between one engine at 7 knots and 2 will be like another 25% gain on average dependent upon the exact speed and the exact boat. And at 17 knots that boat is utilizing much more then 241hp as the curves led you to believe (13.4 X 18 = 241)



What he is saying in the last part is simply confirming that at low planning hull speeds around 13 kts, there is a 34% savings in fuel use over higher speeds in the 19 to 20 kt range. And operating single engine at slightly below hull speeds will realize a 25% savings over 2 engines at the same speed. My*theoretical figures were more like 58%.


And this from a 38' Bayliner owner:
I have run our 38 at hull or lower speeds, mostly lower on one engine for 4 years now. 4 mpg is pretty constant over these years. Approx. but very close.
One other thing. Running on one engine gets better mileage and puts 1/2 the hours on the engines.





*



-- Edited by timjet on Saturday 23rd of October 2010 08:13:50 AM
timjet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 10:04 AM   #26
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

timjet,I thought of another way of expressing this. So you (roughly) halved the power on your boat at 8.3 knots and the resulting speed was 7.1 knots. What would the speed be if you halfed the power at 7.1 knots? I'm sure it would be considerably more than 5.9 knots. So the question that is most enlightening is "how much additional power would be required to increase your speed to 8.3 knots"? The answer is obviously 100%. You would need to DOUBLE the power to increase to 8.3 knots * *..... nowhere near double your speed. So as you reduce power you loose very little speed. This is what makes trawlers work. This is what gives trawlers long range and a good fuel burn. It's true w cars and airplanes too but not to such a great extent. Back to your boat. Say you were cruising at 8.3 knots and a magical force moved your boat forward increasing speed. There would come a point where your boat was advancing as fast as the pitch would allow without any slippage in either direction. There would still be a load on the propeller but only to rotate the propeller blades through the water. The're would be a far less load on the engines. There would be no thrust produced in either direction (fwd or bwd). One can compute this easily. At that point there is no power producing thrust. Only parasitic drag. Slow the boat back down to 8.3 knots and there is a highly loaded propeller producing lots of thrust propelling the boat fwd at 8.3 knots. Now lets shut off the engines without changing the throttle setting. Tie the boat to a good stout float w spring lines and restart the engines still without touching the throttles. I'm going to say that the engine speed will be LESS than 1300 rpm where it would be if we were still going 8.3 knots. The load on the propellers will be slightly more tied to the float but fuel consumption will be less because the amount of fuel injected with each stroke will be the same (throttle not changed) but the number of injections will be fewer. On propulsion engines the governors don't come into play until over max hp engine speed has been reached * * * .....correct me if I'm wrong but I think not. But the most important thing is that one would need to half the power of a trawler at least several times to half the speed. Now back to timjet. If you start the other engine back up again (no throttle change) you speed back up to 8.3 knots. You will burn twice as much fuel but the question is * * ...will you burn half as much if you back off the throttles to 7.1 knots and keep both engines running. Obviously it'll take half as much power (consider previous discussion) so one would be led to believe it would take half as much fuel and without the inefficiencies of running on one engine * * * ...SO * * ... I'm going to guess it would take less fuel to run your boat slowly on both engines than on one. I think the difference will not be great but great enough to easily measure.
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 12:31 PM   #27
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Quote:
timjet wrote:When you shut one engine down you did notice that the speed dropped but you could not know that the govenor on the remaining engine increased the fuel load to make up for the increased loading without your intervention.
*
This is the part I have trouble believing.* Because if you shut one engine down and do nothing else, the loading on the remaining engine will not go up because the boat will slow down to "match" the power being produced by the engine..* For the statement you quoted above to be true, the boat would somehow have to continue to demand a similar loading that it was demanding when both engines are running.* But that load demand is reduced the moment the other engine stops producing power because the boat is free in the water to achieve whatever speed the power of the remaining engine--- which remains unchanged--- is producing.

The boat is the varable here, not the engine.

If two people are paddling a canoe and one of them stops, if the remaining paddler expends exactly the same amount of effort he was expending before the other paddler stopped, all that will happen is the canoe will slow down to "match" the effort being expended by the remaining paddler.* The load on the remaining paddler will only go up if he attempts to maintain the speed both paddlers had produced together. or at least a speed higher than the speed he can produce by continuing to paddle at the same rate and effort he was paddling before.

So it makes no sense to me whatsoever that the remaining engine is going to experience any sort of load increase because the boat in water is going to slow down to match the power being produced.* It's not going to demand more power.* The boat simply matches the power being produced.* It's incapable of demanding more power on its own.

At least that's what logic tells me.* If an engine in a twin was producing 1650 rpm before, it will continue to produce 1650 and burn the exact same amount of fuel as it was before the other engine was shut down.* But the power from one engine at 1650 rpm is not the same as the power from two engines at 1650 so the boat will slow down until it reaches the speed that one engine at 1650 and x-amount of fuel burn produces.* So how does the load on the engine change if the boat is reducing the load by slowing down to match the power being produced?

The boat responds to the power being applied to it.* The power being applied to it doesn't respond to what the boat does because the boat doesn't produce anything for the engine to respond to.* In a vehicle, yes, because they go uphill and downhill and so produce acceleration and deceleration forces that are independent of what the engine is doing.* But a boat doesn't.* I just does whatever the power being applied to it--- engine, sails, or oars--- dictates.* Take away part of the power, the boat matches the remaining power.* It doesn't start demanding more power because it can't. I can only respond.

That's my take on it.* But I'm no engine expert.* I'd be interested to hear what someone like RickB has to say on this subject.




-- Edited by Marin on Saturday 23rd of October 2010 12:41:01 PM
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 01:21 PM   #28
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

When one engine stops the boat slows and the infeed water to the remaining propeller decreases * * *...increasing the load on that engine. If you could increase the the infeed velocity of the water to that propeller eventually you'd get to the point where there would be no load on the prop blades at all. To address the real question timjet has we could throw out this issue I tried to address in the first sentence of this post. Fly stuff. Dos'nt really matter to timjet. The real question is "if TJ is running at 7.1 knots and wants to go 8.3 will he need more or less than twice as much power to attain 8.3 knots?" Because it took half as much power to go from 8.3 to 7.1 knots. So if he starts his other engine up and runs it at 1300 like the other, like before, would the load on both engines be half as much * * ....as it takes twice as much power to go 8.3, or more * ..or less????? * It looks to me like it would be somewhat close. The difference in efficiency would be influenced by the efficiency of the boat going a bit sideways and the rudders deployed to keep the boat going straight w the asymmetrical thrust and the drag of the powerless propeller and the drag of the extra shaft and strut(s) and possibly more. That's a lot to overcome * * ...maybe it would'nt be so close. Looks to me like running both engines would be more efficient.



I agree w Marin in that the quote of timjet is false. But Marin * *...when you go into a dive in an airplane you unload the propeller and when you pull up to a stall you increase the propeller loading. It's the velocity of the infeed air or water that causes the load change when there is no throttle change.


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Saturday 23rd of October 2010 01:32:27 PM
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 01:43 PM   #29
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:

1. When one engine stops the boat slows and the infeed water to the remaining propeller decreases * * *...increasing the load on that engine......

2. Looks to me like running both engines would be more efficient.

3. But Marin * *...when you go into a dive in an airplane you unload the propeller and when you pull up to a stall you increase the propeller loading. It's the velocity of the infeed air or water that causes the load change when there is no throttle change.
Eric----

1. I don't think I go along with your infeed water theory.

2. Bob Lowe, one of the true "gurus" on the Grand Banks owners forum, once ran a pretty exhaustive test regarding running one engine on a twin vs. both engines using his 45' Alaskan (a deFever-inspired wood boat line built by American Marine at the same time they were producing their Grand Banks line.)

While I don't recall any of the figures and comparisons he plotted, I do recall that in the end he calculated the same conclusion you have stated--- that running a twin, at least a semi-planing twin like his Alaskan, on both engines is more efficient than trying to run it on one engine.

There is at least one famous exception to this.* Years ago a fellow decided to run his Grand Banks 42 from Hawaii to California).* He calculated that if he removed the prop from one shaft and set up the prop on the other shaft to be easily removed by a diver in the water, he could make the first half of the trip on one engine, stop the boat, remove the prop he'd been running on,* install on the other shaft the prop he'd been carrying, and then run the second half of the trip on the second engine, he could make the trip without having to carry a whole bunch of extra fuel.* He did this quite successfully, in large part because the weather cooperated and he did not encounter any overly rough seas (for which a GB is inherently unsuited).

But removing the "dragging" prop altogether is a whole different deal than simply trailing a prop, which produces a lot of drag, or locking it off, which produces even more drag.* So based on Bob Lowe's experience with his "Dreamer," I would tend to say that your conclusion is correct.

3.* The airplane analogy doesn't work for the same reason the vehicle analogy doesn't work.* You're adding gravity into the equation.* The descending plane is accellerated by gravity and the ascending plane is decelerated by gravity.* So the plane itself is introducing a force that the engine and propeller see.* You could switch off the engine in a diving plane altogether and it would continue to dive and probably even accelerate.* A boat is not influenced by a gravitational force that is assisting or opposing its forward motion.* It only responds to the power being applied to move it level through the water.* If you switch off the engine in a boat it will simply drift to a stop.


-- Edited by Marin on Saturday 23rd of October 2010 01:52:04 PM
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 01:59 PM   #30
TF Site Team
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
City: JAX, FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Hobo
Vessel Model: Krogen 42-120
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,737
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

We had a "SHAFT LOK"*on a sailboat.* We had to lock the prop because of the transmission.* We didn't like the product.* You had to be careful of the speed when you locked the shaft.* We*ended up changing to a feathering prop.*

The home page does make for some interesting*reading though.<a href="http://www.shaftlok.com/">

http://www.shaftlok.com/</a>

Larry/Lena
Hobo KK42
Muertos, BCS, MX

-- Edited by Larry M on Saturday 23rd of October 2010 02:17:48 PM
Larry M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 03:32 PM   #31
Guru
 
timjet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,905
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

OK guys, we've thrown out a lot of "facts" that may or may not be true, myself included. I've talked to several boat owners who've confirmed that operating single engine on a planing hull boat saves money. This is real word experience, not theory.But why?


Lets review:


Fact: Planning hull boats have much bigger engines than displacement hull boats.


Fact: A certain amount of the power produced by any internal combustion engine is used to power the accessories and an additional amount of power is wasted in internal friction. Power that is not used to turn the prop and that otherwise does no good other than to enable the engine to run.


Fact: A properly configured planning hull boat will use approx 60 to 75% of it's available power to plane the boat at it's design cruising speed. Same for a displacement hull boat.


Fact: Fuel flow above 75% total power available on any internal combustion engine goes up dramatically.


Let's not get into a pissing contest over these percentages, they may be off, but not by much.


When I run at 8.3 knots, my engines (each) are producing 113 HP (of it's available 330 HP) at 1300 rpm. I'm running 2 engines with a total fuel flow of 4.9 g/hr and a total HP of 226 (2x113)
Shut one engine down and my speed is 7.1 knots, fuel flow 2.45 g/hr and total HP 113.


Why do I only loose 1.2 knots when I cut the HP by half?


Answer: Because at this low of speed and HP output, so much of the power output of the engine is wasted, ie used by accessories and lost by friction. So perhaps you could surmise that it takes 2 gal per hour just to turn the engine and yet produce no usable power. Eliminating that engine and you save 2 gal per hour.


Percentages again: At low rpm 75% of the power output of the engine is wasted, only 25% usable and I believe that is the answer.*
timjet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 04:13 PM   #32
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

timjet,

"Why do I only loose 1.2 knots when I cut the HP by half?"


Because the hull looses half of it's resistance. It takes half the power to drive your boat at 7.1 knots as it does to drive it at 8.3. AND it will take twice as much power to go 8.3 as it does to go 7.1. You're stuck in this rut of thinking 1/2 power should produce 1/2 speed.
I know my Willard quite well and it takes about 20 hp to cruise at about 6 knots and it takes about 40 hp to go 7 knots. I read about a Willard owner that had an 80 hp engine in his Willard and claimed 8 knots. If I ran my Willard w 10 hp it would probably do over 5 knots. Planing hulls are not nearly as economical as full displacement hulls but they are more alike than different. It will take less power to drive your boat 8 knots w two engines than it will w one. I read your post and agree that there are some advantages to running one engine but I think with all things considered 2 running is best.
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 04:17 PM   #33
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Okay, I remembered totally wrong. Bob Lowe's tests showed that he increased his range when running on one engine. An interesting fact were the performance increases realized by running on the port engine only and the starboard engine only. They were not the same.

I just looked up the results table he put together in the archives of the GB owner's site but I can't reproduce it here with a copy and paste --- the formatting gets all mucked up. But if you're interested here is the link to his table of results. http://www.mv-dreamer.com/SpeedTrials.htm*

Remember, this was for his 45' Alaskan, which has a semi-planing hull.* Note the speed and fuel burn advantages-- not huge but still there--- of running with the prop freewheeling vs. the prop locked off.

Dreamer is powered with a pair of Ammarine John Deere 6404D diesels (404 cubic inches, working rpm range 1500-2200) driving through Borg Warner Velvet Drive Transmissions.

Here's a picture:




-- Edited by Marin on Saturday 23rd of October 2010 04:36:38 PM
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	dreamer.jpg
Views:	84
Size:	101.7 KB
ID:	3195  
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 08:06 PM   #34
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Got these numbers from Marin's GB guy. The "7K *3.85 gph" is an average of the next higher and lower numbers.




Both engines running:

6.2K / 2.9 gph * * // * * 6.9K / 3.5 gph * * // * * 7.7K */ *5gph


Stbd eng only:


6.1K */ *2.5 gph * * // * * 7K */ *3.85 gph * * // * * 7.6 k */ *5.1 gph


Port eng only:


6.2K */ *3.1 gph * * // * * 6.9K */ *4 gph * * // * * 7.7K */ *5.5 gph


Looks to me as though it's closer than I thought it would be but if you average the numbers running both engines looks more (but not much) efficient. I posted the question on Boat Design and it's a huge site so should get some good response.
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2010, 07:19 AM   #35
Guru
 
timjet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,905
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Eric,Marin's example is not a planning type hull, so consequently the engines are working much harder to produce the speed he is getting whether it is single engine or two. The percentage of the HP used to power the accessories is small.


However even in this case it is plane to see a huge increase in fuel economy by running single engine. I'm curious why at 1700 rpm increases fuel flow so much.


In my case, I have so much power, at the 8.3/7.1 knots, they are barely working and much of the HP they produce as a percentage of the total HP produced is wasted.


Again look at my numbers:
2 engine * 8.3 kts * * 4.9 gal/hr * *= * *1.7 mpg
1 engine * 7.1 kts 2.45 gal/hr *= 2.89 mpg


Now I did mention earlier that a post on a different forum indicated that fuel flow on the remaining engine will go up to maintain 1300 rpm. That was refuted by I believe you and Marin. Personally I don't know, but am inclined to think that perhaps fuel flow did go up a little, but certainly not by twice. Looking closely at Dreamer's figures seems to confirm this.


I'll be very interested to hear what the folks on Boat Design have to say. Please keep us posted.


-- Edited by timjet on Sunday 24th of October 2010 07:35:58 AM
timjet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2010, 07:41 AM   #36
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Quote:
timjet wrote:I'm curious why at 1700 rpm increases fuel flow so much.

In my case, ... much of the HP they produce as a percentage of the total HP produced is wasted.

You need to look at a propeller power curve and the relationships between speed and power.

An engine only produces as much power as the load demands. Saying that power you don't use is wasted is like saying money in the bank or fuel in the tank is wasted.

*

*
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2010, 09:14 AM   #37
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,712
Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

"Running on one engine is definitely saving fuel: friction losses in one engine, gearbox and auxiliary equipment is reduced by 50%. The actual gain is a bit less because prop slip increases due to the higher blade load and there is some extra rudder resistance, but is still significant."

"I made a habit of using just one engine on long trips because it lowered the fuel bills and added a second power steering pump because the port engine didn't have one."----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The above comments were made by a gentleman from the eastern Mediterranean that I have read over time and have considerable respect for.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"I've spent several hours at different speeds trying to answer that question. For my 42ft planing boat there is virtually no speed where running on one engine is more reliable, not even close.If you want to save fuel you do two things: Prep the bottom like a racing sailboat (600 grit finish) and keep the speed less than S/L = 1.1.On my boat if I want the best speed with good range a combination of 25-26 knots @ .8 miles per gallon and 9.4 knots @ 1.9 miles per gallon gives a 14-15 knot average speed and 1.2 mpg. (Running the boat at 14-15 knots is .7 mpg)."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I don't know the 2nd person. He is from BC. Obviously they are 180 apart. And neither of them is even close to my take on the question (hardly any difference). I think Rick has a good idea but it dos'nt take into consideration the inefficiencies of running on one engine, however, it would consider the losses of friction on the dead engine. This question may not be a debatable question as all the variables may not be known. To use Ricks method one would need to know the drag of the boat * *...including running w a trailing prop. I think that probably Ricks method would answer the question IF there was no trailing prop and no asymmetrical thrust. Just considering the power to drive the boat and how much one (or two) engines would consume to overcome such drag would render the single engine operation the hands down winner. But to answer timjet's question one would need to know about the drag variables. I'll keep monitoring the Boat Design post.


By the way I think the GB guy should'nt be dismissed as the GB is more of a planing hull than a displacement, however, it's engines are much smaller.










-- Edited by nomadwilly on Sunday 24th of October 2010 10:04:18 AM
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2010, 10:28 AM   #38
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:To use Ricks method one would need to know the drag of the boat



First off, I don't have a "method."

Secondly, when the boat is running on one engine or two, the power produced by the engine and the fuel it burns is what it takes to move the boat the speed it is going. There really isn't much room for discussion on that.* It is what it is and knowing the drag or the price of tea is totally irrelevant.

Don't you guys ever just enjoy driving your boats around? This discussion really is in the same category as angels on pinheads.

Who really cares if they save 12 cents an hour or spend 11 cents more? If your margins are that small you need to find a hobby you can afford.

If you want to go fast, move the throttle lever forward, if you want to go slow and save fuel, pull it back.
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2010, 11:47 AM   #39
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,527
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

If you want to go fast, move the throttle lever forward, if you want to go slow and save fuel, pull it back.

A grand opinion from a mariner that moves with OPM,

Other Peoples Money
FF is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2010, 12:28 PM   #40
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
RE: Operating a twin on one engine and fuel economy

Quote:
FF wrote:

A grand opinion from a mariner that moves with OPM,
Sorry FF, wrong again as usual.

I pay for the fuel on my boats just like almost everyone else here, always have, always will.

*

*
__________________

RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
twin vs. single engine rages on.... Woodsong Power Systems 38 11-28-2011 06:12 PM
120 lehman fuel economy motion30 Power Systems 9 08-23-2011 09:41 AM
Fuel Economy Question Tony B Power Systems 32 07-26-2011 08:05 AM
Nordic tug fuel economy wingspar Tug Designs 11 12-24-2010 05:30 PM
Moving a twin engine boat sideways(?). Tonic General Discussion 42 11-16-2010 12:09 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012