Sonic anti fouling

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Baker

Baker

TF Site Team/Forum Founder
Site Team
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
7,331
Location
Texas
Vessel Name
Floatsome & Jetsome
Vessel Make
Meridian 411
Has anyone used this technology? I think PYI has a system termed "Sonihull". Just wondering if there is anyone out there that has any experience with this.
 
Greetings,
Mr. B. I think the topic of sonic type anti-foul has been discussed. IMO the resident TF expert is Mr. fstbottoms. (Hope I'm remembering correctly).
 
It has been discussed for decades. And no one I know uses it.
 
Greetings,
Mr.o. Aw, gee. Cut Mr. B some slack. He probably hasn't been paying attention....


200.gif
 
oscar said:
It has been discussed for decades. And no one I know uses it.
Click to expand...

I am well aware that I am not aware of anyone who uses it. It still does not answer my question. Does it work? Or maybe it works but it is prohibitively expensive??? I will search.
 
Thanks Hal. I did search and saw those. Sounds like snake oil to me.
 
I have heard from one or two people who thought maybe it worked. But not conclusive.

A friend was about to install one covering only a portion of his boat to see how it works. Sounds like the only way to get an objective assessment. But the results won’t be available for a while..... not even sure he did it. Will need to check.
 
Boy, there is one person here who will tell you that fstbottoms is a hack for his judgement on Sonic cleaners (they don't really work in his expert opinion)... But others point to limited success.

RickB who I trust with all things marine says at least some applications work. Now .....size of vessel, system bought, how the boat is used, bottom paint, etc...etc all would have to be factored in.

My vote is like most peoples, if it worked so well, why don't at least all the rich, knowledgeable people use them?

I can understand the new boaters and poor guys like me who will dive and scrape not using them...... But guys who go to the best yards and could actually buy those yards and their opinions aren't flocking to the ultrasonic tech.
 
Last edited:
I spent a few hours with a PYI rep last week talking about Sonihull and going through the installation on a friends boat. The rep had some compelling photos and testimonials from the USCG and Kvichak. Unfortunately we won't know how well it's working on this boat until it gets back to the tropics.

Another friend installed a different ultrasonic system (he might chime in on this thread) and reported good results.

I'm still toying with installing the system this winter, but I'm not sure it really addresses a problem for me...I'm already getting 3 years out of bottom paint and underwater fouling hasn't been a problem with a diver checking/cleaning things a couple times a year. The diver needs to be down there to check/change zincs anyway, so cleaning through hulls and running gear isn't much extra work.
 
Ok, How about TF'er JustBob who has it installed on his new Hampton. Although it has low hours, he probably can offer an opinion.
 
Baker said:
I am well aware that I am not aware of anyone who uses it. It still does not answer my question. Does it work? Or maybe it works but it is prohibitively expensive??? I will search.
Click to expand...

I should have said: "It's been around for decades"...... My point was that if it REALLY worked EVERYONE would be using it, as 10 years of bottom paint at $120+ per gallon plus hauling plus labor would offset it at almost any price....

It's one of those things we WANT to work.... like the anti aging cream I keep slapping on my face...or that "wealth manager" that keeps calling me... :rofl:
 
stubones99 said:
Ok, How about TF'er JustBob who has it installed on his new Hampton. Although it has low hours, he probably can offer an opinion.
Click to expand...

Yes I haven't hauled out nor had a diver so unknown at this point.

Why wouldn't they work? The guy that sold me said it was a boat size version of this:
 

Attachments

  • sonicare.jpg
    sonicare.jpg
    24.2 KB · Views: 58
An independent test for this is real easy. Just get a 15' cat without paint. Now put one transducer in one of the pontoons and not in the other. Now put it in the water for a month or two depending on where you are and then have a look. Leave the antifouling paint out of the equation. Yeah its says you need it, but if it works, it should inhibit growth in a noticeable way on gel coat between one pontoon and the other over x time. If not, its not working. If so, I'd buy it.


This is such a simple test study. I don't see it having been done anywhere so far (publicly anyways). If I owned the company, the first thing I would have done is run that test, and I'd have photos all over the internet showing/documenting the results if it worked well. I see no real world tests - nothing..


The reality that there's no simple test studies like this readily available on their site after 10+ years tells me a whole lot.


Show us the money!
 
CEC said:
An independent test for this is real easy. Just get a 15' cat without paint. Now put one transducer in one of the pontoons and not in the other. Now put it in the water for a month or two depending on where you are and then have a look. Leave the antifouling paint out of the equation. Yeah its says you need it, but if it works, it should inhibit growth in a noticeable way on gel coat between one pontoon and the other over x time. If not, its not working. If so, I'd buy it.


This is such a simple test study. I don't see it having been done anywhere so far (publicly anyways). If I owned the company, the first thing I would have done is run that test, and I'd have photos all over the internet showing/documenting the results if it worked well. I see no real world tests - nothing..


The reality that there's no simple test studies like this readily available on their site after 10+ years tells me a whole lot.


Show us the money!
Click to expand...



This is the test a friend is doing, I think. But it’s important to install forward and not aft (or vice versa) on the hull or side of the hull. Depending on sun exposure, growth can be dramatically different on one side of a boat vs the other, and you wouldn’t want that credited to the sonic magic when it’s just the sun.
 
Greetings,

Saint tt. I wish your friend success but $2K to $3K is out of MY price range for a "test". As Mr. CEC mentions, show me the $$ AND the photographic evidence.
Do any of these companies offer a complete money back guarantee? I didn't think so.
 
Baker said:
Has anyone used this technology? I think PYI has a system termed "Sonihull". Just wondering if there is anyone out there that has any experience with this.
Click to expand...


This link is a technical paper on the efficacy of this technology. Testing was performed under controlled conditions. It was inconclusive - but, in my opinion, shows promise. Some commercial implementations may very well be snake oil and without unbiased testing seems like a crap shoot. The equipment does not seem too difficult to build into a system though for relatively short money.



https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...s04_LQ&cad=rja


"The relative effectiveness of the acoustic antifouling tri-
als was also often difficult to evaluate. It was often said
that fouling “inhibition” had occurred or that the surfaces
were “relatively free” of fouling. However, without a
baseline such terms become ambiguous. Often no con-
trol was used and generally little quantitative information
was provided on the amount of accumulated biofouling
that occurred. Very little photographic documentation of
the biofouling trials was found."
 
My marina here in south Puget Sound seems to grow mussels in the thru-hulls. I installed the unit from Australia on my Nordic Tug 32 two years ago and they never grew back. Further, my diver was amazed when he inspected the hull after a little over a year. I recently purchased an older NT 37 and just ordered the same system for it. Although my experience is limited to my own application in my own environment, I would have to say that it works. I stayed with the Australian brand only because I know it worked on my previous boat.
 
RT Firefly said:
Greetings,

Saint tt. I wish your friend success but $2K to $3K is out of MY price range for a "test". As Mr. CEC mentions, show me the $$ AND the photographic evidence.
Do any of these companies offer a complete money back guarantee? I didn't think so.
Click to expand...


That's "Mr Saint TT, to you, my friend :)


I've never looked into them myself, let alone far enough to get pricing. Just glad someone else is doing it, not me. Hopefully we will all get some good info out of it.


I suppose I should go check to see if he actually did it. Last we spoke he was hauled out and debating with himself. But I do recall that they are installed from the inside of the hull, so easy to install, and easy to remove as well.
 
If you have a cored hull the install is not so simple. I'm thinking even once installed correctly on a cored hull the results would be even more iffy. Even if the test is biased and performed by the company making it, that would be something at least.
The theory about how and why it "works" that's on the website is fodder to me. Seems they did "testing" on it not hurting your hull layup ext., so why in the world would they not have done testing on the functionality!
 
Greetings,
Short of any empirical evidence I am very tempted to lump this device/technology in with the magnetic fuel filter device (Algae-X) that purports to kill any "bugs" growing in your diesel.



Maybe, just maybe some noticeable effect was achieved under strict lab conditions and a new "wonder product" was born.
 
CEC said:
An independent test for this is real easy. Just get a 15' cat without paint. Now put one transducer in one of the pontoons and not in the other. Now put it in the water for a month or two depending on where you are and then have a look. Leave the antifouling paint out of the equation. Yeah its says you need it, but if it works, it should inhibit growth in a noticeable way on gel coat between one pontoon and the other over x time. If not, its not working. If so, I'd buy it.


This is such a simple test study. I don't see it having been done anywhere so far (publicly anyways). If I owned the company, the first thing I would have done is run that test, and I'd have photos all over the internet showing/documenting the results if it worked well. I see no real world tests - nothing..


The reality that there's no simple test studies like this readily available on their site after 10+ years tells me a whole lot.


Show us the money!
Click to expand...

That test "might" show some insight but many other variables exist as I listed earlier.

While letting a boat sit like a dock might show great results, an occasionally used boat might show so little difference no matter how inexpensive the system, it might be a bad investment.
 
When we're still asking "does it work" years or decades after a product is introduced, one has to assume it doesn't.

It seems to me, if it were truly effective, every boat in the world would have one by now.
 
CaptTom said:
It seems to me, if it were truly effective, every boat in the world would have one by now.
Click to expand...

ESPECIALLY in this environmentally conscious world we live in now. Bottom paint is not all that great for the environment.
 
How often do ocean going freighters and tankers hauled for a bottom job. They often spend weeks at anchor or in ports. I suspect it is rare that they are hauled. So how do they avoid fouling?
 
jimisbell said:
How often do ocean going freighters and tankers hauled for a bottom job. They often spend weeks at anchor or in ports. I suspect it is rare that they are hauled. So how do they avoid fouling?
Click to expand...


two ways ships deal with bottoms..


1. the good stuff we dont get to use anymore.


2. Hull cleaning robots...


Hull Cleaning Robot for Large Ships.



HOLLYWOOD
 
jimisbell said:
How often do ocean going freighters and tankers hauled for a bottom job. They often spend weeks at anchor or in ports. I suspect it is rare that they are hauled. So how do they avoid fouling?
Click to expand...
By cruising at 25 knots during days :) Joke apart these cannot be compared with our boat usage...

L
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

man7sell
Hull Shield's Ultrasonic Anti-Fouling
Replies
8
Views
1K
fstbttms
fstbttms
backinblue
Anyone boat with a cat?
2
Replies
56
Views
4K
BruceK
BruceK
sledge
ArriveCAN and Nexus in 2024
Replies
28
Views
2K
Endeavor GB 32
Endeavor GB 32
C
Recommended Marinas Acapulco MX?
Replies
5
Views
833
Cargile
Cargile
B
2005 34 Mainship Trawler Solar installation question
Replies
3
Views
619
Bobw0813
B

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom