Wake Experiment #4 Log Out | Topics | Search | Register | Edit Profile | User List
Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Moderators | Help/Instructions
WakeWorld Discussion Board » >> Wakesurfing Archive » Archive through February 05, 2008 » Wake Experiment #4 « Previous Next »
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 8:21 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Iíve posted several wake enhancement experiments in the recent past, one filling spray pockets, one filling hull extensions and along with the hull extension filler tower mounted ballast.

Here are a few pictures on a new experiment "Surf Switch" Ė the details of the fundamental experiment Iíll hold on to, I think it has merit. Itís getting late, Iíll post more detail in a few days.

Riding picture without the Surf Switch - June 1
Upload

Riding picture with the surf switch June 14
Upload


Configuration 6:
The boat set up is as follows:
An 04 Centurion Lightning
Surf Switch Set to regular position #2
Port locker 750 lb fat sack
Center Tank 230 lbs
Bow pop bags 180 lbs - Centered
Tower ballast 40 lb each side
Crew of three
Driver Starboard
Crew Port side

The following pictures are from Speeds 8 mph to 14 mph
Upload
Upload
Upload
Upload
Upload
Upload
Upload


Configuration 8:
The boat set up is as follows:
An 04 Centurion Lightning
Surf Switch Set to regular position #2
Port locker 750 lb fat sack
Center Tank 230 lbs
Bow pop bags 180 lbs Ė Port side
Tower ballast 80 lb port side
Crew of three
Driver Starboard
Crew Port side

The following pictures are from Speeds 8 mph to 13 mph
Upload
Upload
Upload
Upload
Upload
Upload

 
By Mike (shortman) on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 8:37 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Starboard side trim tab??
 
By bryan lionel (lionel) on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 8:48 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Ed, you gotta patent and trademark the surf switch!!! I would like to know what the heck it is?????
 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 8:52 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Surf Switch position #2 - Goofy

Basically opposite ballast configuration as above.

9 mph
Upload
10 mph
Upload

 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 5:46 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Ed, I can't quite tell from the pictures, but it appears that your surf switch allows you to push the boat speed up considerably without affecting the height of the wake. There is an obvious difference in cleaning up the face of the wake, and the pocket length appears significantly longer (which we would expect with an increase in speed) yet I don't see an appreciable loss of height...which is NORMALLY the case with an increase in speed. Is that what you found?
 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 6:43 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Jeff,

This was the first time out with the proof of concept Surf Switch. You can easily see by reviewing posts on this forum that finding or ďdialing inĒ a good surf wake can be a challenge. Iíve put some effort in to building a better wake this year. I think this technique has some potential, but it needs some work and more verification.

This was clearly the best looking wake that Iíve ever seen behind my boat. I think the Surf Switch would let me put more ballast in a boat and it helps to build a longer wake. However I think Iím boat limited, the freeboard on my boat isnít that high and I donít feel comfortable putting in more weight than I have now. By many reports the Enzo and Avy are some of the best wake surfing boats in the business, my Lightning also a Centurion is a converted ski boat to wake boat and probably not the best platform to work with.

Iím going to get another trail in, but Iím not sure when. There are a few more variables that should be changed and evaluated, which is pretty much what you do when youíre dialing in with just ballast.

Pictures are helpful but they donít tell everything. I think you may notice a pretty vertical rooster tail at some speeds. The rooster tail introduces two problems, 1) it comes back down on the wake and disturbs it and 2) it can get in your face while youíre riding. Youíve made similar comments about getting water in your face from the Switch Blade. Iím not sure whatís causing the rooster tail, for now Iím blaming the hull extension Ė pure speculation. The Surf Switch definitely extends the pocket, but in some pictures the rooster tail obscures the view from my fixed observation point Ė the ski pole.

The wake seems to get a nice shape around 9 to 10 mph, then the rooter tail kicks up around 11 mph and generally screws it up, and then it lays back down at 12 or 13 mph.

The face of my wake without the Surf Switch is almost OK to OK. With the Surf Switch itís much cleaner. You can still see the hull extension middle wake feature in the goofy pictures. Iíd say that I agree that the wake height does not drop of too much at higher speeds. Iíd like a more objective way to make the measurement, but that a whole different project.

 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 8:32 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
We've always measured with a fabric roll-up tape - stick a brave soul out there with a rope and tape measure :-) And now to the $64,000 question - what is the basic principal of operation? Trim tabs? Dual mini-blades? It's adjustable as you note here, and in another post you talked about getting pieces back from a metal shop - so...seems to be more than a trim tab. C'mon gives us a hint! :-)
 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 8:42 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
It's not duct tape
 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 9:15 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I can make a heck of a water plume with the right (or wrong) configuration. That's about 5 feet high.

Upload

 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 8:55 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
LOL it's a jet boat w/o duct tape! :-)
 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 5:09 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I don't know if you ever seen the Red Green show or not, but on one episode he made a jet boat out of plastic drain hose, a high pressure washer, and duct tape, Oh and he used a hockey stick as a control lever to change the direction of thrust.
 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 7:55 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
So Ed, you're TRYING to make a jet boat? :-)

My understanding of how the wakezup aka switchblade works is that some of it's functionality was redirection of the prop wash...I can't find ANYTHING on their website or in any review to substantiate that statement. So I hope I'm not just pulling that out of my butt. However, when we've ridden behind a switchblade equipped Enzo that doesn't have the full compliment of ballast you get a very thin lip with a large wake, not unlike the plume you are referring to, so I'm guessing...your surf switch is doing something similar, it's redirecting the prop wash to affect wake height. Am I getting warmer or colder?

 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 9:21 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
No not trying to make a jet boat, though I'm not sure why I get this plume.

I have also read somewhere that the Switch Blade is redirecting prop wash. My approach is fundamentally different from the Switch Blade. Perhaps redirection of prop wash is a byproduct, but I donít have an explanation of why my approach would have that effect.

Last night I was surfing with my regular set up Ė no surf switch. Toward the end of my set I was having trouble keeping up with the wake. The reason for the trouble is that I was losing water back to the lake from my port fat sack, it was less than half full when I gave up. I need to install a check valve at the fill port to prevent further problems. So now I have to make the assumption that I was losing ballast during my surf switch tests. With full port-aft ballast the surf switch enhanced, surf wake should be better than what in the pictures that Iíve posted.:-)

 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 9:37 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Shoot you are not being helpful at all. All I can glean so far is it doesn't involve duct tape or a Switchblade like mechanism. If you find a good swing check valve would you post details please. I need one for my overflow line, right now I'm using a ball valve that I open and close manually because I couldn't find a decent swing check value that would open at a low enough pressure AND fit the 1" ID tubing I have in my system.
 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 9:54 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Right, not sure if I'm going to use a check valve or ball valve. Check valves add pressure drop and slow filling but take no thought or action once installed. On the other hand I know I can get a ball valve at Loweís.

The orientation of the check valve can have a dramatic effect on a ball or flapper type valve. On a work project we replaced the regular ball with a ping pong ball, worked well enough and reduced the cracking pressure.

I think I might need to take Bryonís advice, heck I probably shouldnít have posted these pictures. However patent cost can be pretty high, I think just a patent search can cost as much as $20,000. Actual patent submission probably over $3,000, plus lawyer fees? Iíve reviewed patent but never prepared one.

 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:29 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
I've heard simply patten searches can be done for under a grand. The application process is tedious but not hard...I think the key is use language that gives you broad protection, yet is descriptive enough. You know who you should contact is Larry Mann, he's done them before and can probably give you an idea on the cost and time involved. Does that earn me another hint on how the thing works? :-)
 
By Edward J. Sullivan (bigshow) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:50 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
If I get reasonable protection in place before the Scioto Wakefest maybe you can surf on a Surf Switch wake.

I'll have to shoot Larry an email.

I've got to retool my press release and flyer and then issue - tick tock!

 
By Sean Ward (caskimmer) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 1:53 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Get that going! Our goofy wake sure could use some help from the Wake Doctor. Please doc please, I need some of the good stuff
 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 2:02 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Yeah, I'm with Sean, I'd like to see some aftermarket product(s) that allow a decent surf wake without 2K lbs of ballast, even better if you could flip a switch and change the side being surfed on - OH NO! Did I seem to indicate that the starboard side should even be considered?! :-)
 
By Petr (hawaj) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 7:45 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
WOW
 
By Jeff Walker (surfdad) on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 9:08 pm:    Edit Post Delete Post
Hawaj! How have you been?! We haven't heard from you in a long time. How are things in the Czech Republic?
 
By Stephan Zandbergen (bcanuck) on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 10:49 am:    Edit Post Delete Post
Nice going Bigshow,
Those are some of the best wake pics you have posted.

 
Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions Administration
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
WakeSpace is owned by eWake, Inc.
Copyright © 1996 - 2008, All Rights Reserved.
WakeSpace@WakeWorld.com