This Genius Propeller Will Change Transport Forever

Thank you all for watching and the interesting comments, here are some points to address the main ones I have seen:
- Great points about how this may be manufactured in the future, part of the economies of scale I mentioned could definitely include injection moulding or similar.
- Durability is an interesting point and I would love to see how the blades fair in a 'crash test', they may also be harder to repair? Let me know your thoughts.
- The gain in efficiency is 105% when compared to the original values (38% to 78%), it is true that absolute efficiency cannot be over 100%, but increases can be. Such as a company seeing a 200% increase in profits, for example.
- Many saying that reduced cavitation may also reduce wear on the blades, making them last longer in boats. Great point that I didn't think of!

105% efficiency? Ok bro bring the perpetual motion machine 😂

Da Vinci wasn't that far off

Hi. This prop could have an impact on hobby microlight aircraft, but the cost would probably put it out of reach. Larger aircraft need a variable pitch propeller which obviously this design cannot do. (The variable pitch has the same effect for a plane in the air as a car's gearbox does on the ground). It reminds me of a turbine impeller which has high efficiency, but only over a narrow range of rpm, so this design could also work well in hydro-electric power generation. Cheers, P.R.

The major problem is the cost!

So It could turn room fans and air conditioners much quieter .

Imagine hydro electric applications

№2. It can be not only a pump, but also an effective activator in a mixer of liquid components, that is, thousands more effective mixers in the chemical industry.

№1. This could be an effective coup in oil refining, where millions of pumps are used!!!

Looks like it would be useful in not injuring Manatees!

can someone explain about the vortices 😅

no No Noooo!!!! You are missing the point ...Uhmmm Reverse this for power producing dams... You have X water and want to produce Y kilowatts... You can make the absolute most power for a given amount of water....Hoover is losing water...errr you have 17 generators all producing less kilowatts per foot of water...at 17 to 1 odds awe come on some one has already ran the numbers...RIGht...err right...? Super computers should make this an easy proposal. You have a 95% run time at X rpm. You can custom make a power producing propeller at X rpm per diameter and flow than anything on the planet. THINK BACKWARDS.

This Propeller can really change transportation- I am sure that the question of the production will be solved with new 3D-Printing technologies in future.

* RESPECT= GREAT PRESENTATION

The difference between Sharrow and MIT is that Sharrow engineered it and MIT just generated a bunch of random designs varying parameter and put the intern to print it and test it. 😂

Props do not have to spin so fast as to produce cavitation and aeration. You use more surface area on the blades, more pitch, and larger diameter. Problem is, most motors cannot make nearly enough torque to spin them.
My outboard may have said 200HP, but it’s actual torque (power) was a joke, and it had to spin at 5500 rpm’s to achieve useable power. I converted to a true V-8 inboard that only needs to spin to 3500 rpm’s to produce double the torque of the outboard. Went up to a 18” wheel for far more thrust at a lower rpm. This matters when your motor is under constant load for two hour runs offshore. There is no coast on a boat.

Developed in 1971. Besides huge manufacturing cost, there may be a good reason why it didn’t catch on. Hmmm.

Okay where can I get one these propeller

Can someone tell me, where I can a smaller version of this for RC plane?

I looked into one of these, price was about 5k for my yamaha 150 lol FK that

Engineers making silent assassin drones:
"Yeah no, we didn't ask whether or not we *should*, we just asked whether or not we *could*."

isn't 105% efficiency a little too much.🤣🤣🤣

would it work as in impeller? or could it be used to power a turbine?

What about stacked like turbines

Thank you for a well presented scientific review do more. My ? Have you compared it to a standard sea dual prop.

tyroidal props are fantasy/ For tiny drones they dont have the same thrust and with more surface more fatigue. As for boats, well, how much efficiency is really gained with pushing a boat through water. Its exciting but old and already studied. Keep trying

Do these props work in reverse? A large part of controlling a boat or ship involves reversing the props.

105% sounds like the math went wrong somewhere

Miss information here I'm afraid.
This has been thoroughly tested since the early 70's and it's not usable in most cases for a multitude of reasons.

You are over hyping this propeller like it will change the world. It is a PROPELLER not a jet engine that runs on water. Promoting anything with propellers is taking us back 50-60 years before the jet engine. Go hawk this thing to boat builders, maybe they care

So why aren’t all boats using it already?

Brilliant videos Ryan. I would be interested to see the innovation into computer cooling fans. Where we aim for more sore w/ less noise.

why are we saying this is a propeller and not an impeller please remind me

I wonder if they can use this design in pumps also.

How do we even compare these two? New design might just have sharper angles on its curved flips in total. Did these comparisons also equalized the torque input? Underwater footage just looks like it was strapped to an average ship tail

Pretty interesting!

- But moving parts are not connected through hybrid connection, thus they don't interfere each one with another one bringing new 'whole construction' effects. They are rotated through axis constructing being doubled in working side. Thus enforcement is not that wondering.


- First of all any dynamics going through flows make moving parts (and not only) more solid as construction. Birds, insects, any animal has it naturally. So we can mark such dynamical part as another one detail. Having changes in vibration, shape, etc it transmits, with own value.


Symmetric, opposite load of moving part of propeller's moving part is not broken on construction it is fixed to, with mixing with another one from another moving part. It goes through and back making whole shape, with accumulating of not broken physical and not only effects, bringing new features, effects. Fuel, being organized at micro-macro level, have it in dynamics of explosion, as organization is prolonged in further dynamics. Such part in blood flow has chemistry etc organized co-connections, leading to overhybrid, having self-renewal from entropy as part. It is one of differences of overhybrid to hybrid, simply keeping it much better than 'less-hybrid' types.


Thus for making new antena you need to pay attention to connection of parts. In static, either dynamics. Overhybrid may make moving parts - overstabke antenna with context usage. In statics either dynamics. Skipping huge part of detail with AI effects inside from physical design. Thus your head is not too big. 😅 Bringing co-thinking enforcements to brain. Full dual reusage requiring not simply complex co-consolidation.


As for propeller - it can raise up addition power force from organized noises, besides organized shaped constructions, leading to appearance of new co-flows, like strong camertone, with taking noise energy even from env. With self-organizing by organized plasma, bringing jump in power.

Would be useful in submarines being quieter too

I think it's nothing new for Military submarines to have had this technology long time ago. We just found out today when they have been using it 2 decades ago.

Great job on video

Great video.

Quito-Ecuador 🇪🇨
2023

Clever design

Clickbaiting with that fake 108% efficiency increase. Pathetic

annong

The blades from Bushnels turtle submarine.. Humans always reinvent and forget.

Dört ayrı motor yerine tek motor , helozonik dört kollu pervane daha güzel olur bir motor çarkı cevirse çarka ucu dişli tel konsa sipral diyer ucuna pervaneyi tak dönecektir

Down-voting on the +105% efficiency thumbnail. Obviously done as click-bait. Simply say 105% improvement in efficiency (if that is the case), that is defensible. I can't trust any numbers from this presenter when this sort of mistake is made right in the thumbnail.

Toroidal blade; the push pushes the push, adding force to the next blade. (~9.32%?). Cavitation could be reduced by narrowing the prop flow, and agitating less volume, I recon.
Visualize a torus. (A torus is a sphere, turned inside out, basically. Spheres are the most stable shape. (Both the donut and the hole, so to speak.))

What the internet needs is some insight into propeller theory because the big efficiency gains being claimed for this prop do not even exist in theory. It is unremarkable for a prop to achieve 70% efficiency, hence losses are 30%. Not all those losses are drag. When the blade is operating at its most efficient angle, induced drag is half total drag. This toroidal prop is said to improve efficiency by reducing tip vortices, which are induced drag. Even if you hypothetically reduce them to zero you can only save half the blade drag which is less than half the losses, which is less than 15%. So the claims of “105% more efficient” prop, or “46% more fuel economy”, are ludicrous. They may be getting these things but it is by a bogus comparison not by a design ‘breakthrough’.
Furthermore, when it comes to airplanes, typical prop efficiencies are higher still, tip speeds are transonic and the last thing you want is the extra wave drag you are going to get from that toroidal tip design. So don’t be thinking what may work on a small drone will work the same on a full sized airplane. Aerodynamics does not scale up like that