The cynic in me immediately says "so many moving parts, maintenance will be quite a problem", but I don't really have the expertise to make that a argument against the success of this concept.
Wikipedia says this type of propeller is widely used on tugs, so I guess the ABB product is either just their own version of this tech (maybe a patent expired) or they have evolved it somehow, maybe to increase efficiency depending on how you interpret the article.
In a Voith Schneider propeller, there is one power input (as in a rotating shaft) plus a second shaft input that gives the desired thrust direction, and a complex gearbox that drives all the blades and the collective. These are in wide use in tugboats and the like, desired for their ability to output thrust in any direction at a moment's notice. However, their disadvantages are that they are less efficient than traditional propellers, and they don't scale up to high revs or high power output all that well, because of the gearing and the mechanical losses involved.
In this design, there is one large electric motor that drives the collective, and an individual electric motor at the base of every blade. The claim is that this gets you the maneuvering advantages of a V-S, while not suffering from the same disadvantages, and because of better control over the blades is not just more efficient than a V-S prop, but more efficient than traditional screws. And in theory it should scale as big as you want it, which would genuinely make it a significant advance that would see fairly rapid adoption.
That's if it actually works in practice, the only prototypes so far are very small and you don't really know if something scales until you actually scale it.
I have a response to what was the original top comment but now got displaced[0].
In short:
1) If you trivialize any technology nothing is new. Advances happen (mostly) by small steps, not leaps and bounds. According to the article it is more efficient. Seems like a win. Even if it isn't huge or crazy different. Is the lack of novelty because of: their tech? Our understanding of the tech? Something else? Who cares? If it is different it is different.
2) So what if it isn't (very) new? According to that wiki article that engine is made by one group. So even if its novelty is simply different enough to bypass a patent or in house knowledge, so what? More competition is good. What's the point here? We love monopolies? Only one company can make one type of thing? Type being at the abstract level, not detailed?
I'm not sure how either of these is helpful. Maybe you're saying something else, but it isn't clear to me.
I am more worried about there is no video of a ship moving on three main website and youtube videos. One is 12 min. Only men talking, 3d animation and lots of waves. Did not search further though.
I'm so confused how this works, but based on this animation I found, it seems like it just shoves the water sideways in the direction of thrust, then turns so it's cutting though the water in the opposite direction https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ub563Yc3xls
In case you wonder how landlocked Switzerland would be so involved in such marine work, ABB is a Swedish-Swiss corporation and the pictures were clearly taken in the Baltic Sea (in the Gulf of Bothnia or Gulf of Finland).
> independent testing of a passenger vessel fitted with different propulsion systems found that the ABB Dynafin solution managed energy savings of 22% compared to conventional shaftline configurations.
That's compared to propeller shafts I think (and powered by what? Diesel, Gas turbine?).
Voith Schneider systems are generally used on tugs and smaller ferries due to the manueverbility control they provide, it's not clear how energy efficient Voith Schneider systems are to shaftline systems.
I'm not a swimmer but that sounds like a pretty reasonable fear. A propeller of any sort will mess you up pretty bad. And if I understand correctly, the larger vessel gets the right of way so if you aren't in a vessel you just go smoosh.
Jup, except that a helicopter system does not use independent control. The blade angle is controlled mechanically, each next blade will at the same position have the same angle. This new thing seems like it has independent control of each blade. But I'm not sure what they can do with that that wasn't possibe with a helicopter-like setup.
I think it's unlikely you'll see a helicopter with this tech soon. This runs at 40 rpm. A helicopter main rotor is more like 400 rpm. And getting a blade "misaligned" at speed in a helicopter would immediately tear the whole thing apart.
During the last centuries there was a technological shift in cargo ship drives roughly every 100 years. From sailing to steam boat over combustion engines to these drives?
Readit News
The cynic in me immediately says "so many moving parts, maintenance will be quite a problem", but I don't really have the expertise to make that a argument against the success of this concept.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voith_Schneider_Propeller
Here is a video of a tug boat using this technology, sadly only showing the boat moving but no close up of the propeller.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6uNECa_X8Q
In a Voith Schneider propeller, there is one power input (as in a rotating shaft) plus a second shaft input that gives the desired thrust direction, and a complex gearbox that drives all the blades and the collective. These are in wide use in tugboats and the like, desired for their ability to output thrust in any direction at a moment's notice. However, their disadvantages are that they are less efficient than traditional propellers, and they don't scale up to high revs or high power output all that well, because of the gearing and the mechanical losses involved.
In this design, there is one large electric motor that drives the collective, and an individual electric motor at the base of every blade. The claim is that this gets you the maneuvering advantages of a V-S, while not suffering from the same disadvantages, and because of better control over the blades is not just more efficient than a V-S prop, but more efficient than traditional screws. And in theory it should scale as big as you want it, which would genuinely make it a significant advance that would see fairly rapid adoption.
That's if it actually works in practice, the only prototypes so far are very small and you don't really know if something scales until you actually scale it.
In short:
1) If you trivialize any technology nothing is new. Advances happen (mostly) by small steps, not leaps and bounds. According to the article it is more efficient. Seems like a win. Even if it isn't huge or crazy different. Is the lack of novelty because of: their tech? Our understanding of the tech? Something else? Who cares? If it is different it is different.
2) So what if it isn't (very) new? According to that wiki article that engine is made by one group. So even if its novelty is simply different enough to bypass a patent or in house knowledge, so what? More competition is good. What's the point here? We love monopolies? Only one company can make one type of thing? Type being at the abstract level, not detailed?
I'm not sure how either of these is helpful. Maybe you're saying something else, but it isn't clear to me.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40044358
Should this be called foamware?
In all seriousness, it would be great if it worked out, but we are constantly seeing marine tech being messed up by the marine environment.
There's a reason that every damn thing that has "Marine" in its title, costs ten times as much.
It really, really sucks to be stuck out in the middle of the ocean, because your shaft rusted.
Hm, is that a lot?
> independent testing of a passenger vessel fitted with different propulsion systems found that the ABB Dynafin solution managed energy savings of 22% compared to conventional shaftline configurations.
Oh. That's a lot!
Voith Schneider systems are generally used on tugs and smaller ferries due to the manueverbility control they provide, it's not clear how energy efficient Voith Schneider systems are to shaftline systems.
I think it's unlikely you'll see a helicopter with this tech soon. This runs at 40 rpm. A helicopter main rotor is more like 400 rpm. And getting a blade "misaligned" at speed in a helicopter would immediately tear the whole thing apart.