CCC 2013

[Alan]

Hoping y'all don't mind if I post a note about the Cordless Canoe Challenge 2013 here. The rules recently published in Watercraft specify 60v of "power" for one of the two classes. I've had confirmation from Pete Greenfield that this actually means "the sum of the nominal voltages of the cordless tools" - which could be guessed but wasn't obvious.

[Jeremy]

I'd sort of guessed that this was probably what he meant, but thanks for confirming it.

TBH, I'm not at all sure that this is an effective power limit in practice, as you could still run three 18V tools in the "low" power class and get a pretty massive amount of power.  The power rating of the lower voltage tools is practically the same as the higher voltage ones, it's just that the lower voltage ones draw more current to deliver the power, so tend to have a shorter battery life.  A friend acquired a job lot of old drills, mainly decent quality ones like Makita and DeWalt, and irrespective of voltage they all seem to use very similar size (and hence power) motors.

 I don't think that battery life is a serious issue for any realistic course around the Beale Park lake, so I have a feeling that there may not be much to differentiate the upper end of the "low" power class from the lower end of the "high" power class.

A good illustration of this was Joe's performance when running on only three drills in one of the heats.  He seemed darned near as fast on three 18V drills as he was on four, and I reckon may well still have won this year with just three drills, which would be under 60V and so fit in the "low" power class.

My personal view is that splitting the classes by the number of tools allowed would have been a better way to divide things, as there is very definitely a power limit from only using one power tool, rather than several.  If the low power class had been restricted to just a single tool then it would, in effect, become the super efficiency category, whilst the unlimited power tools class would be for the out and out speed merchants.

[3styler]

Can I just introduce myself? I went to Beale park this year and family commitments permitting will enter next year. I am a dinghy sailor who sketches and doodles boats all the time so I thought that this is a good opportunity to make something and see if it floats.
 
For my first attempt, I am keen to try in the restricted class as it puts a cap on my time and budget, and makes it a more interesting design challenge. I also don't want to run into a fast boat (or even a working hydrofoil.......:) ) in my first heat.
 
Initially the 60v rule made sense, however now I have looked at the options, 60v is not really restricted. There are too many combination and in some ways too much power. Is it 4 * 14.4v, 3 * 18v, or 2 * 24v? That's around £800 worth of power tools there......... I think that there will be some fast boats there, snapping at the heels of the unrestricted as above that 60v limit adding any more tools bring a lot more cost and complexity for not necessarily a big increase in performance (we will see.....). What the 60v ruling might do is make it a competition for the best home built gearbox which is a shame as that is not the main purpose of the competition.
 
IMHO, the voltage ruling is a reasonable way of doing it but the number of tools should come down. For a restricted class 36v seems more sensible as it makes an interesting choice 2 *18 or a single 36v and limits cost, complexity and gearbox building........:)

[Jeremy]

Welcome!

I'm glad it's not just me that's worked out that the restricted category isn't really very restricted at all.  I think you're absolutely spot on, there is the potential for some very fast (8kts plus) boats within the sub-60V category.  I did some measurements on my 18V Lithium powered Makita and found that it will deliver in excess of 700W (input power), which means that three of them (which would still be OK in the restricted class) would be close to 3hp.

I think I paid around £250 or so for my 18V drill a couple of years ago, so you're also right about the cost, three of them today would probably cost close to £800, which is double the allowed budget for this years competition and puts entry outside my allowable "playing around" budget.  

My personal view is that the restricted class probably isn't worth bothering with if you want build a fun craft on a tight budget, as the out and out racers will undoubtedly realise that they stand a better chance of winning by restricting themselves to three 18V, high power, tools and entering that class rather than the unlimited category.  

[Timmo]

Bit like the world of Formula 1 where engine size is restricted to 2.4 litres. Given that street legal 'super cars'  often run to 5 litres plus it shows it's more about efficiency than size.

Jeremy's thought is an interesting one. Will the 'restricted' class end up being the Formula 1 of the Cordless Canoe Challenge and the unrestricted class become the wacky racers group?

Perhaps there's room in the future to introduce an endurance class as well. How far can a rig go on one charge (no swapping batteries during the attempt.)

There was an earlier comment that there could be a 'one drill' class. Think that could be worth trying one day too. All the options should keep the competition interesting for years.

I'm really enjoying this addition to the calendar. Was a stroke of genius. Thanks Pete and all those who helped make it happen and thanks to those keeping it alive and interesting. Roll on next year!

Can anyone think of another idea along similar lines to the ABBA and CCC. I have the feeling there's room for just one more 'competition' to engage boat builders and boat users at the Beale Park show. Will clearly need to be something that can be reduced to a punchy acronym. If any thoughts do come in I'll do the honourable thing and post them into a new thread on that topic.

Tim.

On 29 Oct 2012, at 08:15, Jeremy [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

My personal view is that the restricted class probably isn't worth bothering with if you want build a fun craft on a tight budget, as the out and out racers will undoubtedly realise that they stand a better chance of winning by restricting themselves to three 18V, high power, tools and entering that class rather than the unlimited category.  

[Alan]

Hello 3styler, welcome.
Looks like we're discussing the rules after the horse has bolted! I agree with Jeremy's comments and most of 3styler's. The wacky entries could choose as many as 5 12v drills for the 60 class and these are available for as little as £30 each and I think this kind of entry is very much in the spirit of the CCC. The 600 class entries could spend literally thousands but this would be getting a little pointless when a "real" electric propulsion system could be bought for less.
So, with the benefit of hindsight and the comments above I suggest there could be a 60Wh class which would include one of my drills or two smaller ones, essentially a single drill class as Tim suggests, and easily policed by looking at the battery.
Still reading your Watercraft article Tim,
alan

[Jeremy]

A battery energy limit would have made far more sense, as you say Alan, it's easily checked by looking at the battery and limiting total energy makes more sense in terms of keeping the cost of entries down.

As a sort of reference point for energy availability, Joe won this year using four Makita drills with either 14.4V 1.3Ah or 18V 1.3Ah batteries (I think), so had between 75Wh and 94Wh of energy available.

Under the new rules you could use three 18V BL1830 battery powered tools in the restricted category and have around 162Wh, which is around double that Joe used, so in theory there is scope for a very fast boat indeed within the restricted category, far faster than Joe's boat (or any of the other entries we've seen so far).

Personally I'd quite like to have seen a far more restrictive limit for the restricted category, one that would really challenge people to be ingenious in terms of squeezing efficiency from both the boat design and the propulsion system and one that could be entered by those on a tight budget, yet still give them a chance to win.  

[3styler]

I think we are all saying the same thing here.......less tools - more interest....:)

The battery thing is interesting as look at this example.......say you use 3 *18v tools = 2100 watts (at the battery) and your boat does 8 knots. It will complete the short course, say 1/2 nm in 3.75 say 4 minutes. This is a total of 140 Wh. This means a 60Wh limit halves the performanace of a "restricted" boat. good. Also if you could get a boat to plane it does give it a big advantage as you could throttle back once at altitude...

However, we have what we have, so I'm off looking at the hpc gears / screwfix catalogue right now.......:). I am presuming we can use any brand of power tool.

There is one thing I hope does not happen though - When I spoke to Pete before the event rules were published he expected all the "racing snakes" to be entering in the 600. If on the day all the racing snakes are in the 60V catagory, will they try and arbitrarily try and put them together which means a boat designed for one class is now competing against the other?

[Jeremy]

3styler wrote

There is one thing I hope does not happen though - When I spoke to Pete before the event rules were published he expected all the "racing snakes" to be entering in the 600. If on the day all the racing snakes are in the 60V catagory, will they try and arbitrarily try and put them together which means a boat designed for one class is now competing against the other?

I think that may be a bit of a vain hope, I'm afraid.  If I were to enter again, then I think I'd want to use the rules to my best advantage, whilst keeping cost down.  I did some provisional calculations on power requirements for a hydrofoil, based on the known power consumption of a couple of fairly well-known human powered hydrofoils, the Flyak and Mark Drela's Decavitator.  These manage to fly on much less than 1kW input, in the case of Decavitator it maintained 18.5kts over 100m on around 1kW.  Decavitator could complete the Beale Park course (assuming it could turn OK) in around 1 minute, using only around 17Wh.  The Flyak is a little slower than Decavitator, at around 15kts, I believe, but probably uses less motive power, as paddling isn't as efficient at making use human power as the big propeller on Decavitator.

Converting a lightweight K1 into a hydrofoil like the Flyak wouldn't be that difficult, and it could easily achieve similar, or greater, speeds on a couple of fairly cheap drills, provided the drive system was optimised.  With three powerful drills it should be possible to get speeds in excess of 20kts, I would have thought.

The power required vs speed when foil borne pretty much follows a cube law relationship, so if you had 160Wh available and three drills that will take the 700W or so that mine will,  then in theory you could probably do something like 25kts or more in the restricted category, if you could get things optimised.  That has to be more appealing to the speed freaks than being in an unlimited category where they would probably need to spend a great deal more money to stand a chance of winning, and probably wouldn't actually go that much faster, either.

[Alan]

Yes, I have to admit that I see no advantage in the 600 unless the prizes were much more desirable than the 60 prizes. I have two 18V 3Ah drills and will now consider forking out for a third (secondhand).
What I see as a potential problem now based on comments about speed, is that we could be draining our batteries in under two minutes, a 30C discharge which the batteries are not designed for and they could start failing. The cheapest genuine 3Ah battery for my drill costs £65. What could solve this potential problem would be to run all boats on the 600m course to force competitors to use a lower discharge rate, assuming Beale management agreed re. the course.
gotta go, dog barking.

[3styler]

This thread is really interesting and has changed my thoughts from saying "let's do it" to well "maybe" .....  if I am going to spend my time making something what should it be?

something semi displacement - to me would be the most enjoyable and satisfying, a proper boat and could be used as a family canoe afterwards and what I think the "restricted" rules were intended for.......

something planing  - might give a hydrofoil a run for its money but most likely to be beaten. not that keen.

hydrofoil - well everyone is doing it but there is alot of design work involved and it is a different sort of build.


I was wondering if someone tell the management i.e. watercraft about this thread so see if they can adapt the rules? or might that get us into trouble?

[Timmo]

On 29 Oct 2012, at 15:45, 3styler [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

I was wondering if someone tell the management i.e. watercraft about this thread so see if they can adapt the rules? or might that get us into trouble?

Don't worry Alan. Pete at Watercraft reads the HBBR Posts!

Nabble spat out his attempt at a direct reply so for those that didn't get it:

But hang on chaps... A one drill class? An endurance class? A third competition? Trouble is, Water Craft is already taking up quite a lot of everybody's 'lake time' and the organisers' on-water schedule of events is pretty tight as it is.... My fear would be that too many organised events/displays on the lake would inhibit, even deter, the boatbuilders from putting their boats on the water to take out prospective customers on an ad hoc basis .... and I'm keen to get more of both to the show.

That said... For that third competition.... and on the strict understanding that the HBBR will organise it, not me... how about Armchair Sailor Races? I mean literally. Armchairs in boats.

Pete G

Just for clarity, I'm happy that the event evolves and suggestions I made would be alternatives to experiment with in the future, not for immediate implementation alongside existing rules. 

Now: arm chair sailing, that's got some thoughts going. Obviously we would have to define armchair! Maximum wattage, sorry, I meant minimum levels of stuffing etc. More ideas like (or even unlike) that! And you're right Pete, they have to compliment, not compete with the events that are already there and not involve you in any more work!

Tim.

[Jeremy]

Pete tends to drop in here from time to time, so my guess is he may see it anyway.  

A hydrofoil doesn't need to be very complex, although there is a fair bit of work needed to optimise foil sections etc.  I don't know if you've seen the Flyak (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQRtgEIs--k ) or this three year hydrofoil surfboard project: http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/easter-project-2009-hydrofoil-26995.html, but both seem to show that you could make a basic hydrofoil fairly easily.  Starting with on old sailboard would probably be the best budget option, as old "floater" sailboards can be acquired very cheaply, I believe.  There'd be a bit of work in making foils, but the real challenge would be engineering a deep drive system and maybe making the foils retract so that you could launch from the Beale slip.

Looking at this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oyWMusaDTI though (see about 45 seconds in) it seems as if an ordinary planing sailboard might be just as fast as one on foils, so there may be scope for something fairly simple and fast that planes, without the complication of hydrofoils.

[Jeremy]

Pete G wrote

But hang on chaps... A one drill class? An endurance class? A third competition? Trouble is, Water Craft is already taking up quite a lot of everybody's 'lake time' and the organisers' on-water schedule of events is pretty tight as it is.... My fear would be that too many organised events/displays on the lake would inhibit, even deter, the boatbuilders from putting their boats on the water to take out prospective customers on an ad hoc basis .... and I'm keen to get more of both to the show.
>
> That said... For that third competition.... and on the strict understanding that the HBBR will organise it, not me... how about Armchair Sailor Races? I mean literally. Armchairs in boats.
>
> Pete G

Pete,

I don't think anyone was suggesting a third class, or being overly critical, it's just that several of us seem to have read Watercraft and independently reached the same conclusion, that the restricted category isn't really very restricted at all.   It effectively allows a lot more power than last years maximum (set by tool cost).  

As has been mentioned above, restricting tool voltage doesn't really restrict available power much, if at all, or keep entry costs down, if that was the aim.  If the aim of the restricted category wasn't to keep costs down or restrict available power, then we've all clearly got the wrong end of the stick!

[Alan]

Tim, it wasn't me who asked for a rule change - blame 3styler!
Just for the record, I wouldn't presume to change the rules this year, all we are doing here is having a very lively debate which will probably influence the rules the year after. We can discuss things together which we didn't think of individually when asked to give our opinions by Pete.

If there was going to be a third race maybe it should be for the professional builders in their boats, no handicap so not too serious but a good opportunity to show their wares and good spectator value. I think it would be good for Beale, but not relevant to us of course.

[Timmo]

Ideas for another 'event' could be broader than just a race. Needn't be afloat at all, just be boats orientated. The two I think we already have are the CCC and the ABBA. Both very different. My mind has gone 'tripod' and is fishing for a thought about a third 'thing' that engages another group of people. Won't go into why I'm intrigued by the idea here, that would be too much of a thread hijack. Will probably create a separate thread in a week or so.

Another thought that did come was maybe something to do with alternatively powered boats, but again, very unformed thoughts so far.

Tim.


On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:14, Alan [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

> If there was going to be a third race maybe it should be for the professional builders in their boats, no handicap so not too serious but a good opportunity to show their wares and good spectator value. I think it would be good for Beale, but not relevant to us of course.

[momist]

On 29/10/12 16:48, Jeremy [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:
> A hydrofoil doesn't need to be very complex, although there is a fair
> bit of work needed to optimise foil sections etc.  I don't know if
> you've seen the Flyak (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQRtgEIs--k )

1HP seems to be enough:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=jh_RhkejWLw

Turning seems to be problematical though.

[3styler]

Jeremy wrote

A hydrofoil doesn't need to be very complex,

I'm looking forward to see that duck punt flying.....you already have a light stiff hull, and a vertical drive system which could be extended......:)

The links were very interesting. Many thanks.

[Jeremy]

I'm reasonably sure that Quackers could be made to fly without a great deal of extra work, just by adding a foil where the mast step tube is (supported on a telescoping leg through the mast step tube) and a rear foil on the drive leg itself.

My problem is that, after a very lengthy delay caused by a host of legal and planning problems, I shall be starting to build our new house in the spring.  This means that I most probably won't have time to do anything for next year's competition, unfortunately.

[GregHBBR]

Hi Jeremy,

On 30 Oct 12 11:39 "Jeremy [via UK HBBR Forum]"
<[hidden email]> said:
> I shall be starting to build our new house in the spring.

All filmed for "Grand Designs"?