induction? ( vented / ported / slotted ) boards : what's the principle at work?

General Discussion
81

Hi,

So what I need to know is the exact date the First Adjustable Wing Twin fin came out.

 

Thank you

WaveFin

82

Nobody knows, so lets get back on topic here.

induction? ( vented / ported / slotted ) boards : what's the principle at work?

You can create a new forum of your own if you want to talk about adjustable fins. There might even be one all ready up and running on that topic which buy the way has been around for a long time. This one might give you some more ideas to ad to your fin system. Check out the forum called:

Rotatable Edge Performance Fins.

83

[quote="$1"]

So what I need to know is the exact date the First Adjustable Wing Twin fin came out.

[/quote]

Here's a news flash.    A twin fin is two single fins!   You should have done your homework a little better, eh?    Sorry to pop your bubble.

84
  • **Can we start talking about the topic this forum is about again now? **
  • **Go back to the post before wavfins first post and start over please.**
  • **Thrailkill I'd like to here your thoughts on the subject. **
85

not plugging or spamming, but company in the UK did some work on this trying to understand and explain the effect of introducing vents through the board : http://www.hammerandthresher.com/revotube-development/

 

86

A few comments on patents.  I started the process 3.5 years ago on something I invented, non-surf related.  I was concerned that it may not be worth the money. (Mine is currently stalled in prior art backlogs). However, if somebody makes a “patentable improvement,” my attorney indicated that I still hold the dominant patent.  The patent only provides protection in the country where it was filed.  The bottom line is enforcement and that can be costly.

Some considerations:

  •  As mentioned by the patent attorney earlier, get an attorney who will work on contingency.  Enforcement is pointless if the infringer is not making significant money/profit with your invention.  Therefore, you may want to wait until an infringer is making millions with your invention before suing.

  • However, the following may be the best reason to get a patent.  In the software world, broadly general patents are being filed and awarded like candy.  The new thing is for patent companies to buy up large portfolios of patents (or rights to them) and then use them to sue the big software companies for infringement – it is cheaper for the big software companies to settle than go to court.  To protect themselves, software companies are now acquiring large patent porftfolios also.  The best reason to file/get a patent today may be to ensure that somebody else cannot prevent you from making and selling your own invention.  Just a thought.

A good read on the software patent issue:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/26/138576167/when-patents-attack

BTW you can count on a patent costing close to $10,000 when everything is said and done.

87

1

88

There interesting. I think I will contact them and buy a few sets
and test them out . But still it’s the sucking air concept. I was
thinking forced water induction through intake ports near the front
third of the bottom. Then through a tube that exits at a downward angle
through exhaust ports just in front of the fin area  to create some lift
from water being jetted out the bottom of the rear exhaust ports and
through the fin area . What do you think? Or is it all B.S.?

89

Hey Mitch

My understanding is you want to separate the laminar flow from the board, giving it less drag.

I feel your idea would not work, firstly you would have to scoop water creating drag, then lead water through a pipe [diameter?, installation? build integrity?], deviating the water from a straight line creating drag, plus the minimal of amount of lift you would create with a small opening would be blasted away by the water flowing at super high speeds underneath the windsurfboards, you do go fast on your boards, right? 

If you want more lift, i would try flatter tail bottoms or more voluminous/wider tails. What wind conditions are you looking to enhance which design for? Maybe making a sail that has a resultant upward vector? All sails have remained -sort of- flat for years.

Cheers

90

[quote=“$1”]

Hey Mitch

My understanding is you want to separate the laminar flow from the board, giving it less drag.

I feel your idea would not work, firstly you would have to scoop water creating drag, then lead water through a pipe [diameter?, installation? build integrity?], deviating the water from a straight line creating drag, plus the minimal of amount of lift you would create with a small opening would be blasted away by the water flowing at super high speeds underneath the windsurfboards, you do go fast on your boards, right? 

If you want more lift, i would try flatter tail bottoms or more voluminous/wider tails. What wind conditions are you looking to enhance which design for? Maybe making a sail that has a resultant upward vector? All sails have remained -sort of- flat for years.

Cheers

[/quote]This system is going to be for surfboards not windsurfers.You may be totally correct though. And that’s why I’m asking for feedback and thoughts about the system. I understand what you mean. I was thinking that unlike a jet port which takes water through a larger intake port and propels it out of a smaller exhaust port with the assistance of a motor to create thrust. (There will be no motor on a surfboard) So I was thinking to do the opposite. A smaller intake and a larger exhaust port. Just to create a small amount of water pressure current exiting to create a type of flow disturbance and lift through the fin area directed through and between the side fin and center trailer fin depending on which way you’re turning. The board will also have a soft double concave bottom through the last third of the bottom through the fin and  tail area. My thought is to have these port systems made out of a composite or plastic to be installed in much the same way you would a fin box. I know it sounds out there but I don’t think we will really know in till one of us actually makes 1 or 2 or 3 of them to tests the concept. It may be a complete bust. 

91

huh/?

   did my eyes play tricks or did wavecraft and wavefin sign off with the same spam?

 

**   cheers huie
**

92

huie: What do you mean that we sighned off with the same spam?

93

Despite the fact that successful perpetual motion devices are physically impossible in terms of our current understanding of the laws of physics, the pursuit of perpetual motion remains popular.

wavecraft you cant get out more than you put in. amplifiers use energy.

 

94

 induction? ( vented / ported / slotted ) ... Might add enough drag to make a finless surfboard stable, but won’t add speed or thrust to a planing surface (Water to water). Air might help.  http://www2.swaylocks.com/forums/air-step-technology

95

I got some old pictures of Vinny Bryans "ported " boards–Bob Smith glassed them on Kauai, in the early 70’s–A bitch to glass–Ask Vinny how they worked–My thought is that you have to go too fast to "ram " enough air in to make it workable–Concaves have better dynamics, in my way of thinking-- But then again, life is for learning …Mac

96

does capillary action play a role? 

totally agree though that concaves/channels do help direct wave energy to where it matters-- the fin cluster

cheers,

97

you're looking at it in reverse.

like looking a gift horse in the ass.

 

herb

98

Hey Herb.  Finally found your original thread with pics.  Very cool.  I can see how it could easily be patentable relative to past concepts alluded to.  Any action on the patent?

It’s a shame about the sh!t the cyberspace a-holes gave you.  I can relate.  I posted a 3-wheel standup-luge-skeleton design (off-road or street) on a longskate forum so nobody could patent the idea, a design I invented and built .  I even posted a video of me riding it on its first test flight.  I literally gave the concept away to anybody that wanted to use it.  Instead of discussing the design, all I got was an endless stream of BS about why I could have never patented it in the first place.  I had no plans to patent.

This cured me of interest in posting most of my designs/creations on public forums – with the exception of maybe one forum.

You’ll always hear, “Somebody must have done that before.”  After I published my first theory in a professional journal, I have a corollary I use for new ideas and inventions,

“Somebody has to be first.”

Hope you recover the cost of your patent at the very least.  Personally I hope you make enough to buy a small island in the South Pacific.

99

Well
everybody check out http://wavejet.com/ It’s already been patented and
trademarked.It’s going to be for short boards, long boards, SUP’s and even scuba diving. It’s slated to to go into production and will be available
some time in 2012. Looks like the closest thing to Pablo’s propulsion
system that I’ve seen so far, but not that fast. It will be an assist to paddling helping to propel you 3 to 4 times faster than you can under human power alone. What do you think?

100

The pic is the Hap Jacobs fluted simmons twin-fin from.....?........years ago.   ......slanted holes through deck to feed air into concave bottom etc.  There were a few similar from Shanes in Aus in the 70's.....far as I know , no one has used these principals to good effect so far..........I reckon water goes on the bottom-air goes on top.......