Anyone ever looked into using/testing inducer impellers, very interesting stuff and im going to give it a try as it may help boost slow speed thrust without losing top end speed.
We just started working on the inducer impeller to feed and pre-load our main impeller.
A little on the topic here:
https://www.speedboat.com/2015/11/06/new-ss-inducer-impeller-by-place-diverter/
https://www.ksb.com/centrifugal-pump-lexicon/inducer/328124/
Yes this might help get more efficiency. We did kind of stator vanes like in turbofan jet engines. However we were not able to get below 1,8kW power usage during riding.
At that time we were already working with ducted prop as well. As we are able to ride now with only 700Watt we changed to ducted prop. We still see potential now to get below this value… This means currents below 20Amps… No cooling required anymore…regardless which ESC you use…
Remember one of the key factor ist the efficency of your wings… Most on the market are not very good.
Esp. those from china…We soon might deliver a very efficient front wing profile to the crowd here… so you all can benefit from this…
Give us another month to decide;-)
And remember, the need of water cooling like the one one liftfoil will cause serious problems after some hours in salt water…We wanted to avoid this, and why we worked hard on the efficiency of wings and propulsion…
.Always keep some water under your wings.;-)…
Nice article.
https://www.placediverter.com/home/product-category/jet_boat-impellers/ shows the outcome of their research.
Yes, I have read and watched several videos on inducer impellers and some of the big major jet companies and and builders use these and they do dramatically improve low speed thrust, which is when most jet drives are cavitating and very inefficient. Really interesting stuff.
So, as a rough estimate, the best impeller “consumes” 1KW more than the best nozzle.
IMHO, providing a front wing with thickness to chord ration less or equal to 11% will not be enough. Supfoil Front wing profile is 13 to 15%. They provide lift but bring a lot of drag.
My suggestions here in this post. The Hydrofoil “plane” itself can be modified.
Interesting, we at VeFoil have a backer who designs many foils and he has proven these thick foil wings for more lift cause so much more drag than a thin and slightly larger surface area its dramatic. wing foils for air he states are not the same in terms of performance in the water because of the density of water.
The foil fish is super thin and works incredibly well for its size vs a super thick foil I found in terms of drag, less power required to move forward.
We are looking into some of his super simple designs for increased performance.
Well guys it`s not all about thickness and ratio…All correct at certain views…but… The profile must be good for best efficiency… and most foil designers use profile designed for completey different usage…
Mostly designed for Reynalds numbers above 2 000 000…But with e-foils we are in a range of about 1-200000…
Just to give you an example:
We tested the Moses Windfoil Wing 683 which is really a very good one, easy ride and I would say very good for efoils as well… Power needed 1000W at 20km/h -compared to the takuma foil with about 1200W quite good…same setup…
Using our wing profile (where we did long research on) with same size and thickness with our profile we were riding with 800W same setup… total weight about 100kg and in sweet water…
You can see there is a lot possible with the wings design…not only the propulsion 
And we could push that even more, but our main goal was to find an easy to fly wing and second point was the eficiency…
Is it possible to use a brushcutter 52cc outboard to push a hydrofoil board? Thanks.
A Moses Front wing for a windsurf board is not the best profile if I may add something.
The kitefoils have always beaten up the windfoils severely and that is where the innovations are. They have less weight constraints also.
Not that I don’t trust you but I am a bit sceptical. I’ve been witnessing the French guys launching the kitefoil activity since 2008 (10 years now) based on Carafino design. The best guys from Spotz (closed down), Taaroa, Manta, F-one (all French) then Banga bought by Enata and today Chubanga going at 45knots+ with a kite and you’re telling us you have thought about something they didn’t 
Why not ? I would have been convinced straight away if your bench mark front wing had been one from Enata or Chubanga who are leading the Kite Hydrofoil Pro Tour. Then, the stabiliser profile is also important. A mismatch and you loose a race.
Lot of development based on CFD and experiences in race kitefoils since the last few years, I do kitefoil since many years at the same spot where the founder of Moses kite also, and Luca, the guy who launched Banga, Enata in UAE and now is back to Italy producing Chubanga is a friend, we live quite close so I had the chance to see how he work, own one of his foil and broke and have the same modified many times. The exceptional flow and performances of such a race wing can’t be ok for our motorized foils.
We weight to much, never lean against the foil nor have the same variable support that foilers have.
I build 3 foil, full carbon, between my first old style Moses and the Banga, effectively the RE number consideration is real and not all the profile behave as expected, if you go thin you’re half way, then anhedral, span to cord ratio…all play its role. First Banga was straight but feedback during gybe and reach was not perfect even tho a “flat” wing is more efficient on paper (software). I think a mix between racekite and huge surf foil could be where to look…
Not to mention that our thrust acts on the opposite side of the board as with a kite.
As the propeller rotation ? I change to left rotation with FR propeller , may be that is why it took some time …
Yes but dont forget we dont need a racefoil here… and if you say the moses 683 is not the best profile this is relative. Best profile for kitefoil windfoil or efoil or race foil?
It all depends where you want to use it, and for e-foil Moses 683 is quite ok in respect of easy flying handling and efficiency. And with our profile we have similar handling but 20% more efficiency, so we are quite happy.
For an efoil you want to have a wing that runs from 20 to 40km/h at a weight of 100kg and it should start flying at 15km/h. And should be stabel at that speed.
All the kitefoils are used totaly different…mostly at 40km/h+ and at only a third of the weight…
So don`t compare apples with pears…
And yes you can increase efficiency with canard setup (that we use as well) or with less stabilizer force. a.s.o…but as I said the main goal is easy stable ride for e-foil with big speed range…second was efficiency…
I love your approach. this is exactly what I want to do. I think the amount of current people are drawing with their designs is insane and the weight of the batteries you’ll need, and the safety of that much amperage as well…and all the over specs components you need. High efficiency isn’t talked about enough.
How big is your front wing? High aspect ratio? I have a few wing designs I’ll test but first I need to get my propulsion unit working…finally have all parts. I’m trying to use as low of a prop pitch as possible.
What size of prop are you using? Your efficiency is impressive.
I follow the same strategy. First get as much thrust as I can out of my motor to get around 35kg of thrust. That seems to be a common requirement here. Then try my kitefoil and cnc different wings.
Elevate, like MikeL I appreciate your approach too. Especially for the first time in hydrofoil history, eFoils provide an objective environment with figures (volts, amps, speed) and I’m sure that kitefoils and windfoils development in return will beneficiate from that too.
Yes, speed and weight range do matter. I mentioned Banga and its Chubanga heir because a lot of CFD has been carried out, extensively tested before and during competitions and their high AR front wing is surprisingly easy flying and very tolerant according to the people who have tested them.
As you mentioned “profile efficiency” my answer was targeted at that point.
Moses 683: not obviously optimised for least drag as it is a freeride front wing. It would be interesting to test your new wing back to back with the 639 (windsurf competition with high aspect ratio) more optimised to that aspect which doesn’t necessarily mean unpleasant flying handling.
As a conclusion, if you have the same footprint as the 683 with same profile thickness but use a more efficient airfoil section and get the same speed with 20% less power, congratulations. 
I would appreciate your 639 figure comparison if available.
By the way, do you have an availability date for your line of products ?
As per:
I have to politely disagree. Seems to me that the kinematic viscosity in the Re formula was not switched from air (10-5) to water (10-6)
200.000 is 5 to 8 times too small. According to the values you gave us (40 kmph that is 11m/s), water temp = 10°c
Moses 639, Windfoil competion low drag high AR, Re = 1.600.000 max at wing root
Moses 683, Freeride fun, low AR, Re = 1.100.000 max at wing root
One thing to notice is that if one decides to use the same wings on a kitefoil with a wingspan shorter by 40% (40cm typical value), the Re doesn’t change because only the chord length is considered in the Re formula.
You understood me wrong. I said the moses 683 works quite well… but they use the wrong profile as well…It works good but it is not optimized for our use, and theerefore another wrong assumption.
You dont optimize it for 40km/h but for the point where you want a stable ride and that is much less speed therefore you end up with REnumbers below 400000. If you want to create a race efoil yes you can go your approach…
What profil would you use for the rear wing? I am using a less than ideal kite foil that has some negative lift and I had to compensate with a shim
You should play with XLFR5 for some time… very nice analysis features and it’s a good starting point. Take time to read the user manual, for analysis readong
